Appeals Panel Blocks Trump on Restricting Asylum at Border

Finding the policy unlawful, a federal appeals court on Friday halted President Trump's attempt to sharply restrict asylum access for migrants crossing the US-Mexico border without authorization. In a 2-1 ruling, a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that federal immigration law does not permit the president to create new rapid-removal processes or suspend migrants' ability to seek asylum, CBS News reports. Writing for the majority, Judge J. Michelle Childs said Congress, in the Immigration and Nationality Act, did not give the executive branch the "expansive removal authority" claimed by the administration. Judge Cornelia Pillard joined the opinion; Judge Justin Walker concurred in part and dissented in part.

The policy at issue stems from Trump's first day back in office, when he issued a proclamation describing an "invasion" at the border and ordering a suspension of "physical entry" for undocumented migrants until he declared the situation over. The Department of Homeland Security then told border officials that people crossing between ports of entry could not apply for asylum and could be removed through new "direct repatriation" or "expedited removal" procedures, without standard screening on fear of persecution or torture. Immigrant rights groups sued in 2025, arguing that the order and DHS guidance violated the INA and exceeded presidential authority. A federal district judge ruled in their favor, and the DC Circuit on Friday largely upheld that decision.

The decision means the Trump administration could have to accept applications from asylum seekers at the southern border, per the New York Times. It does not take effect for seven days, giving the administration time to ask for the case to be reheard by a larger appellate panel or to appeal it to the Supreme Court—which already has a case about whether migrants can be turned back at the border before they can file an asylum claim. The White House suggested the administration will fight the decision, per the Washington Post. Lee Gelernt, an ACLU lawyer who handled the appeal, said Friday's ruling makes clear "that the president lacks the power to unilaterally override laws passed by Congress."