Trump v. Sierra Club

Cite as: 591 U. S. ____ (2020) 1

B
REYER, J., dissenting
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
_________________
No. 19A60
_________________
DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES,
ET AL. v. SIERRA CLUB, ET AL.
ON MOTION TO LIFT STAY
[July 31, 2020]
The motion to lift stay is denied.
J
USTICE BREYER, with whom JUSTICE GINSBURG,
J
USTICE SOTOMAYOR, and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting
from denial of motion to lift stay.
Just over a year ago, I suggested “a straightforward way”
to avoid irreparable harm to the parties in this litigation:
stay the District Court’s injunction “only to the extent” that
it “prevents the Government from finalizing [relevant] con-
tracts or taking other preparatory administrative action,
but leave [the injunction] in place insofar as it precludes the
Government from disbursing those funds or beginning con-
struction.” Trump v. Sierra Club, 588 U. S. ___, ___–___
(2019) (slip op., at 2–3) (opinion concurring in part and
dissenting in part from grant of stay).
Now, the Government has apparently finalized its con-
tracts, avoiding the irreparable harm it claimed in first
seeking a stay. The Court’s decision to let construction con-
tinue nevertheless, I fear, may “operat[e], in effect, as a fi-
nal judgment.” Id., at ___ (slip op., at 2). I would therefore
lift the Court’s stay of the District Court’s injunction.