Ammon Bundy and four of his co-defendants are heading temporarily to Nevada on Wednesday after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied their request to block the move.

Defense lawyers had asked the court to put a hold on U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown's transfer order, arguing that it would impair their ability to effectively represent their clients and prepare for a trial now set for Sept. 7 in Oregon.

Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy, Ryan Payne, Brian Cavalier and Blaine Cooper are among 19 people facing federal indictment in Nevada stemming from the 2014 armed standoff with federal officers outside the Bundy ranch near Bunkerville, Nevada. They also face federal indictments in Oregon in connection with the 41-day armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge outside Burns.

A three-member panel of the appellate court issued the ruling Tuesday, citing a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court opinion, but offered no further explanation.

The U.S. Supreme Court case of Hilton v. Braunskil reiterated standards governing when a hold, or stay, should be placed on a civil judgment: when the person requesting it has made a strong showing that he or she is likely to succeed on the merits; that the person will be irreparably injured without a hold; whether issuing a hold would substantially harm other parties; and where the public interest lies.

Mike Arnold, Ammon Bundy's lawyer who already purchased a plane fare to fly to Las Vegas to support his client at his scheduled hearing in Nevada, responded to the appellate ruling, saying: "Ammon Bundy will not sacrifice his right to a fair trial for his right to a speedy trial. The government should dismiss the Nevada case until the Oregon case is resolved or create a machine that will allow my client to be in two places at once.''

Cooper's court-appointed lawyers in Oregon and Nevada filed separate motions later Tuesday with the federal court, asking that Cooper be allowed to waive his appearance in Nevada, and make his first court appearance there via video instead.

Brown has said she believes the narrow tailoring of her order -- that the five co-defendants be taken to Nevada to make their initial court appearances in Las Vegas and then return to Oregon by April 25 -- won't cause the defendants "irreparable harm.''

Defense lawyers argued that federal prosecutors in Nevada lacked the authority to demand the defendants be transferred to their jurisdiction, when the defendants are already facing indictment in Oregon.

They've said that the transfer, even for a brief time, would violate their clients' rights to effective representation in preparation for trial.

Federal prosecutors countered that the defendants did not meet the burden of proving any extraordinary circumstances that would warrant placing a hold, or a stay, on the defendants' transfer.

-- Maxine Bernstein

mbernstein@oregonian.com

503-221-8212

@maxoregonian