Background
Plaintiffs challenged a Secretary’s Order implementing an Executive Order to review and potentially remove interpretive materials at national parks that they alleged disparaged Americans or failed to focus on American achievements. The district court granted a stay of the Secretary’s Order and issued a preliminary injunction requiring the restoration of removed materials, finding the plaintiffs likely to succeed on their Administrative Procedure Act claims and that they faced irreparable harm.
The court’s reasoning
The court applied the four-factor test from Nken v. Holder to determine whether to grant a stay. It focused on the first factor, likelihood of success on the merits, concluding that the Department was likely to succeed because the district court erred in finding irreparable harm. The appellate court held that the plaintiffs’ allegations of harm were speculative, not directly traceable to the Secretary’s Order, or based on generalized public interest rather than specific injury to the plaintiffs. Since the plaintiffs could not demonstrate irreparable harm, the Department was likely to succeed on appeal, satisfying the first factor and justifying the stay.
What it means going forward
The stay reinstates the Secretary’s Order and the National Park Service’s review of interpretive materials while the appeal proceeds, halting the district court’s mandate to restore previously removed content.