...
By Dan Gooding
Associate News Editor
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
President Donald Trump's ban on asylum was ruled illegal Friday, with a three-judge panel saying his executive order couldn't circumvent existing immigration laws.
Trump signed the order in January 2025, effectively closing the pathway to asylum, particularly along the U.S.-Mexico border where hundreds of thousands of immigrants had arrived over the previous four years.
Friday's decision means the president's order was deemed unenforceable because existing immigration laws say all those who have entered the U.S., including those who enter illegally, have the right to seek asylum and have their case heard.
Read More on Politics
“We strongly disagree with this ruling from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals—this will not be the last word on this matter," a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told Newsweek. "America’s asylum system was never intended to be used as a de facto amnesty program or a catch-all, get-out-of-deportation-free card."
Newsweek also reached out to the White House via email Friday afternoon for comment.
While Trump's policy tightened restrictions even further, the final months of the Biden administration had also seen a near-total ban on asylum at the border because of the high numbers of illegal crossings. That policy also saw legal challenges.
Why The Ruling Matters
The U.S.-Mexico border saw a significant surge in legal arrivals and illegal crossings beginning at the end of Trump's first term and lasting through late 2024. Many of those who arrived claimed asylum, with a policy allowing them to remain in the U.S. while their cases were pending.
Both Biden's restrictions and Trump's ban led to a dramatic drop in new arrivals, but critics argued the U.S. was failing to uphold longstanding humanitarian policies which granted safe entry into the country for those claiming asylum.
Friday's case in particular centered around what powers the president has compared to immigration laws passed by Congress.
...
Trump's Asylum Ban: What the Court Ruled
The court blocked key parts of Trump’s January 2025 border proclamation, ruling the administration cannot use emergency “entry” powers to bypass Congress’s immigration and asylum laws once migrants are already inside the United States.
The sweeping ruling, by a three-judge panel, found Trump's executive order and subsequent DHS guidance unlawfully replaced the Immigration and Nationality Act’s (INA) mandatory removal procedures. The panel also found the administration illegally barred migrants from applying for asylum and curtailed mandatory protections against removal to countries where they may face persecution or torture.
While acknowledging Trump, or whoever is president, has broad authority to suspend entry at the border, the court drew a sharp legal line—entry powers do not include the power to order removals using procedures Congress never authorized.
“If the Government wishes to modify this carefully structured and intricate system, it must present those arguments to the only branch of government able to amend the INA: Congress," the judges wrote.
The move was welcomed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), one of the groups which had fought the Trump administration's policies.
“This decision puts an end to the inhumane Trump policy of sending people, including families with little children, back to horrific danger without even a hearing,” ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who argued the appeal, told Newsweek in a statement. “The court made clear that the president does not have the unilateral power to wipe away all of the asylum laws enacted by Congress.”
What Does This Mean for Asylum Seekers?
The ruling allows asylum seekers already in the U.S. to apply for protections once again, regardless of how they crossed the border.
It also means if a federal agent detains an asylum seeker inside the country, they must accept their claim rather than rejecting it outright, which has been the blanket guidance under Trump.
Immigrants seeking asylum also cannot be removed or deported unless they have fully been through the INA's processes and their case has been denied.
The case does not, however, undo any restrictions on entry at the border itself, as the president does hold the power to decide who can, and cannot, enter the country. This in itself could keep the flow of migrants from the southern border low, but if immigrants do manage to cross into the country between official ports of entry, they could still be considered for asylum.
"President Trump’s top priority remains the screening and vetting of all aliens seeking to come, live, or work in the United States," the DHS spokesperson added. "We will use all of the tools in our toolbox to ensure that the integrity of our legal immigration system is upheld, fraud is uncovered and expeditiously addressed, and illegal aliens are removed from the country.”
Update 4/24/26, 2:05 p.m. ET: This article has been updated with additional information.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines