Opinion
2:23-cv-00080-LEW
08-22-2023
NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION, et al., Plaintiffs, v. PETE BUTTIGIEG, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL
LANCE E. WALKER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiffs have appealed the denial of their motion seeking a preliminary injunction. In denying their motion, I concluded that they had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits or that they would suffer irreparable injury in the absence of injunctive relief. Plaintiffs now request that the Court offer more limited relief in the form of a stay pending the First Circuit's review of that order.
In ruling on a motion for a stay pending appeal, a court considers (1) whether the party requesting the stay made a strong showing of likelihood of success on the merits, (2) whether the party will be harmed irreparably without a stay, (3) whether other interested parties will experience a substantial harm if a stay is entered, and (4) relevant public interests in the controversy. Dist. 4 Lodge of the Int'l Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers Local Lodge 207 v. Raimondo, 18 F.4th 38, 42 (1st Cir. 2021). Most critical to the inquiry are the first two factors.
For the reasons set forth in my Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 38), Plaintiffs' request for a stay of construction activities pending appeal is DENIED. SO ORDERED.