The docket is State of New York et al. v. Donald J. Trump et al., No. 1:25-cv-01144 (S.D.N.Y.). CourtListener records the case. The four-page order signed “PAUL A. ENGELMAYER, United States District Judge, sitting in Part I,” dated February 8, 2025, New York, New York, is on the SDNY site and in the RECAP archive (ECF 6).
The order states that the court, sitting in Part I, received an application for a temporary restraining order from the attorneys general of the 19 plaintiff states. It recites the states’ challenge to a Treasury policy that, as alleged, expands access to Bureau of the Fiscal Service payment systems to political appointees and “special government employees.” It finds, in the court’s words, that the states “will face irreparable harm in the absence of injunctive relief,” citing “the risk that the new policy presents of the disclosure of sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking.”
The decretal paragraphs restrain defendants from granting access to Treasury payment records, payment systems, or other Treasury data systems containing personally identifiable information and/or confidential financial information of payees, other than to specified Bureau of the Fiscal Service civil servants, and restrain granting such access to “all political appointees, special government employees, and government employees detailed from an agency outside the Treasury Department.” The order also directs destruction of copies downloaded from those systems by persons in the restrained classes, sets a show-cause hearing before Judge Jeannette A. Vargas on February 14, 2025, and notes that the matter was assigned on a permanent basis to Judge Vargas.
Those words are his. Later preliminary-injunction work in the same caption is Judge Vargas’s. Do not merge the two. A temporary restraining order is not a Supreme Court holding. It is not a crime. Impeachment resolutions that followed are filings, not removals.