Aloha Friday

February 20, 2026 — Aloha Friday

Feb 20, 2026
0220 Aloha AM TT·0220 Aloha Friday Federal Court news Update AM YT
L.R. v. Trump · 24-1287
[NEEDS TRANSCRIPT REVIEW]

[NEEDS TRANSCRIPT REVIEW — L.R. v. Trump 24-1287 appears in the episode case registry story list for the 0220 Aloha episode but is not covered in the transcript available. This is a First Circuit docket. Likely a TPS (Temporary Protected Status) case — Bryan was previewing Monday SCOTUS arguments on TPS (Mullin v. Doe) and may have covered a related circuit case on the same episode. Alternatively, may have been listed on the opening graphic but not verbally discussed due to time constraints.]

[NEEDS TRANSCRIPT REVIEW — if TPS case: immigration
Constitutional question: [NEEDS TRANSCRIPT REVIEW]
Philadelphia v. Burgum · 26-cv-00434
Workers in Philadelphia are outside right now putting the President's House slavery exhibit signs back up. The administration complied with the court order. Bryan did not see that coming.

Follow-up to the 0217 AM episode. The preliminary injunction ordering restoration of slavery-related signage at the President's House in Philadelphia was issued earlier in the week. Bryan expected the typical response: appeal, delay, stay. Instead, workers were reinstalling the signs as he broadcast. Bryan's editorial read: "This story gets me right in the right spot" — he's a history buff and the exhibit covers the nine enslaved people Washington brought to Philadelphia. The immediate compliance was the story.

Constitutional question: See 0217 AM.
Tincher v. Noem · 26-1105
The appeal of an injunction against ICE use-of-force at Minneapolis protests has been put on pause — because the operation it covered ended. So it's a pause of a pause of a pause on pause.

The district court had issued a preliminary injunction restricting ICE agents in Operation Metro Surge from using force against protesters in Minneapolis. Noem appealed, and the Eighth Circuit stayed the injunction pending appeal. The wrinkle: Tom Homan ended Operation Metro Surge. So the injunction on appeal now governs zero active officers. The plaintiffs asked the Eighth Circuit to hold the appeal in abeyance and let them dissolve the original injunction, then file a fresh one covering current ICE operations. The government objected. The Eighth Circuit sided with plaintiffs: hold until March 6, let plaintiffs dissolve the old PI and seek a new one. If no district court decision by March 6, the appeal resumes.

Civil procedureFirst Amendment
Constitutional question: Whether the executive can moot an injunction on appeal by ending the specific operation it targeted, then continue equivalent operations under a different name — and whether the First Amendment protection from use-of-force against protesters attaches to the activity or to the named operation.
Garcia v. Noem · 25-cv-02780
The Maryland court just issued what looks like a permanent immigration injunction for Kilmar Abrego Garcia. The administration's argument that his removal order became final in 2026 — not 2019 — rested on a nunc pro tunc correction they now wish hadn't been filed.

The 2019 immigration judge who ordered Kilmar's removal forgot to write the second half of his order — the withholding of removal to El Salvador — creating a scrivener's error. In 2025, that judge issued a nunc pro tunc order (now for then) correcting the record. Neither party objected. The government then argued this correction reset the finality clock to January 2026, meaning Kilmar had only recently become removable, and six-month detention clock hadn't run. The Maryland judge rejected this: nunc pro tunc orders don't change what happened — they document what the court actually did. The immigration judge issued the full order in 2019. He just forgot to write it down. Resetting finality based on a clerical correction would mean no time limits in immigration law could ever be enforced — anyone could manufacture a "typo" to restart the clock. The judge then measured how long Kilmar had been detained, noted he was willing to go to a third country (Costa Rica) but the government kept proposing Africa, and found the government had no real removal plan. Result: permanent injunction. ICE cannot take Kilmar into immigration custody. Bryan: "Happy Friday, Kilmar."

Immigrationhabeas corpus
Constitutional question: Due process limits on indefinite immigration detention (Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 — government must have realistic removal plan or release; detention beyond six months presumptively unconstitutional); whether government purchases of detention in a foreign facility count as custody for constitutional purposes.