I am pretty sure this is not the way it was written in the original filing. Apart from that some clarifications are given in the sentences that follow the first one, the one quoted.
edit: found the following and thought of sharing .
Plaintiffs, representing Palestinian human rights organizations and individuals, sue the US Government under international human rights law for its failure to exercise influence over Israel to prevent genocide.
The MTD is one of the first things that a judge needs to decide, and it was argued by the government at that hearing:
It is not the court’s role to sit in judgment of U.S. foreign policy decisions concerning the conflict in Gaza or to assess whether Israel has transgressed limits imposed by international law
Right after that quote in the article, you can find a link to the full MTD.
The MTD is one of the first things that a judge needs to decide
That makes sense.
It's just that the way your initial comment was:
The Friday hearing was about the government’s motion to dismiss
made me think that this was the only thing discussed.
So briefly, on Friday started the hearings of the case Defense for Children International-Palestine v. Biden, and Biden's defense lawyer said their piece, which was -at least in part- their MTD.
(I haven't watched all the videos yet. Will do to have a better understanding of the case.)