Which statement best describes the difference between a temporary restraining order (TRO) and a permanent injunction?

• A. TRO is short-term and immediate; injunctions are granted after a full hearing and can be permanent.
• B. TROs require a full hearing; injunctions are issued without notice.
• C. TROs are permanent by default; injunctions are only temporary.
• D. TROs are issued after service of process; injunctions do not require service.

Answer: (A)

Temporary restraining orders are emergency orders designed to stop harm immediately while the court arranges a fuller hearing. They’re intended to be short-lived, preserving the status quo until the merits can be fully argued. A permanent injunction, on the other hand, is a final remedy that the court grants after a full evidentiary hearing where both sides present their case, and it can last indefinitely.

That contrast is why the best description is that a TRO is short-term and immediate, and an injunction is issued after a full hearing and can be permanent. The other statements mix up how these orders work—for example, TROs aren’t always limited to a full hearing before issuance, permanent injunctions aren’t issued without notice in typical practice, TROs aren’t permanent by default, and service rules apply to both types rather than neatly distinguishing them as the options suggest.