This was shared with us plaintiffs. Below is an AI summary of the government's opposition brief filed on February 23rd. IMMpact Litigation will file their reply to this on Friday, February 27. After that, the court has scheduled oral arguments on our motion for March 18.



**1. The Court Has No Jurisdiction** The government leads with this. They cite a recent Eleventh Circuit case (*Kanapuram*, 2025) holding that the INA strips courts of jurisdiction to review the *pace* of I-485 adjudications. Essentially they're saying: you can't even sue us over this.

**2. The Pause Is Not a "Final Agency Action"** Under the APA, courts can only review *final* agency decisions. The government argues the pause memoranda are temporary, interim guidance — not final decisions — because no applications have actually been denied. Processing continues; only the final decision is deferred.

**3. The Pause Is Not Arbitrary and Capricious** The government argues the APA standard is "exceedingly deferential" and only requires a rational connection between the facts and the decision. They point to:

* A foiled Election Day 2024 terrorist plot by an Afghan national
* The November 2025 killing of a National Guardsman in D.C.
* Presidential findings that 39 countries have widespread document fraud, corruption, and unreliable criminal records

**4. Plaintiffs Can't Show Irreparable Harm** The government argues all claimed harms are speculative — no plaintiff has been fired, expelled from school, or placed in removal proceedings. Delay alone, they say, doesn't constitute irreparable harm.

**5. National Security Equities Favor the Government** They cite *Trump v. Hawaii* (2018) heavily, arguing courts should defer to the executive branch on national security matters and that the government doesn't need to "conclusively link all pieces of the puzzle" to justify its position.





  


Nezameslami v. DHS — Summary of the Government's Response Brief (Filed Feb. 23)