WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday declined to immediately halt a lawsuit brought by immigration judges challenging restrictions on their public speaking engagements.

The court’s order, a placeholder, rejects a request by the Trump administration that the justices said had “not demonstrated that it will suffer irreparable harm” at this stage of the litigation. There were no noted dissents.

Immigration judges sued over a Biden-era policy that prohibits them from making statements in their personal capacities about immigration or the agency that employs them. The National Association of Immigration Judges said such restrictions violated the judges’ First Amendment rights and interfered with their ability to guest lecture at universities and to speak to community groups about matters of public importance.

But the immediate issue for the Supreme Court concerned the proper venue for resolving employee complaints. It is a question that took on new meaning after President Donald Trump fired the head of the Office of Special Counsel and the chair of the Merit Systems Protection Board, administrative agencies that are typically the first stop for such claims by federal employees. The outcome could have implications for other claims brought by federal government officials related to the conditions of their employment.

The Trump administration has separately fired immigration judges across the country. The judges are part of an administrative court system and make decisions about asylum claims, deportations and other related matters. They are overseen by the Executive Office for Immigration Review, a division of the Justice Department.

The justices’ order came in response to an emergency application from D. John Sauer, the solicitor general, who asked them to pause the lawsuit temporarily while the administration seeks more formal review by the Supreme Court. In its response Friday, the court said the administration could re-up its request if the district court took action before the justices have decided whether to formally review the matter.

Sauer warned that a lower-court ruling that had allowed the case to move ahead threatened “to wreak havoc” if the justices did not step in to block it.

In 2023, a district court judge dismissed the association’s case.