The U.S. Supreme Court received briefs from red states, business organizations, conservative groups and one U.S. senator asking it to uphold a nationwide injunction barring enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act.

Some 13 friend-of-the-court briefs were filed Jan. 10 and Jan. 13 opposing the reporting law. The Justice Department stood alone defending the act as needed to uncover money-laundering schemes by shell companies.

U.S. attorneys had sought an emergency order reinstating Monday as the reporting deadline. The day passed, however, without a decision from the court.

The Justice Department turned to the high court after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant in East Texas.

Mazzant and two other judges have ruled the law exceeds Congress’ authority to regulate commerce, foreign affairs and tax collections. Federal judges in Oregon and Virginia have ruled the act constitutional.

In the face of conflicting District Court decisions, U.S. attorneys are pressing the Supreme Court to reinstate the law until appeals courts have ruled.

The government is confident the law will stand up because it falls comfortably within congressional powers, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar stated in a court brief Jan. 13.

The act requires an estimated 32.6 million small businesses to report to federal financial crime investigators the names, birth dates, addresses and driver license numbers of owners and others with substantial control.

A broad coalition including the American Farm Bureau and National Cattlemen’s Beef Association opposes the law as a overreach by Congress and a violation of civil liberties.

Attorneys general from 25 states including Idaho filed a friend-of-the-court brief asking the Supreme Court to not reinstate the reporting deadline. U.S. Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyoming, filed a brief with the same request.

U.S. attorneys say bad actors register phony businesses to launder money. In a brief to the Supreme Court, attorneys cited a Russian oligarch and Iranian citizens who set up phony businesses to evade sanctions.

Delaying the law will slow down the campaign to get businesses to report and make the U.S. an “outlier” in enforcing international anti-money laundering standards, the government argues.

While three federal judges have ruled the law is likely unconstitutional, federal judges in Oregon and Virginia have ruled it’s constitutional.

In the most recent ruling by a District Court, Judge Jeremy Kerndole in Tyler, Texas, likened the law to making homeowners register their homes with federal authorities because drug traffickers might stash drugs there.

“If Congress can regulate an entity simply because it exists, then it can regulate anything — or anyone — at all,” wrote Kerndole, a Trump appointee.

The 5th Circuit put the law on hold shortly after Christmas and scheduled a hearing in March. The law will stay on hold unless the Supreme Court intervenes.