A federal appeals court temporarily halted an order that would bar Biden administration officials from communicating with major social media companies while it considers the government’s request for a longer-term pause.

The Justice Department is arguing that it should not be forced to comply with the nationwide injunction while it pursues a full appeal in the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeals court said on Friday that it will put the ban on hold — known as an administrative stay — while the government presses its case before the New Orleans-based circuit judges.

The appeal will be placed on an expedited schedule while a panel of judges assigned to the case will decide on the government’s request to keep the nationwide injunction on hold until the case is finished, according to Friday’s order. The court didn’t specify a schedule for those next steps.

Friday’s order came from a three-judge panel assigned to handle the government’s emergency request: Judge Carl Stewart, appointed by Bill Clinton; Judge James Graves, appointed by Barack Obama; and Judge Andy Oldham, appointed by Donald Trump. It didn’t note any dissents.

A Justice Department spokesperson declined to comment.

US District Judge Terry Doughty on July 10 denied the Justice Department’s request to delay his order, rejecting the government’s contention that it was overly broad and did not clearly define which communications between agencies and social media company employees were prohibited. Government attorneys argued the order would chill necessary and lawful communications between the administration and companies including Twitter Inc., Meta Platforms Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s Google.

If the 5th Circuit ultimately denies the Biden administration’s request for a pause, the Justice Department has signaled it will likely consider immediately petitioning the US Supreme Court to intervene.

If the ban is allowed to move forward, government agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services and the Federal Bureau of Investigation will be barred from contacting social media companies for “the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”

The plaintiffs — the Republican attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri and individual users who say they faced repercussion for their online speech — have accused Biden administration officials of unconstitutionally coercing social media companies to take down unfavorable information about Covid-19.