Illégal: U.S. court blocks Trump asylum ban
In Washington, a federal appeals court on Friday blocked Donald Trump’s proclamation aimed at stopping people who entered illégally through the Mexico border from requesting asylum in the United States. The ruling keeps the asylum process open for people physically present in the country while the legal fight continues. It marks another setback for the administration’s push to tighten immigration enforcement at the southern border.
Court rejects Trump’s attempt to narrow asylum
A three-judge panel of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said immigration laws give people the right to ask for asylum at the border and that the president cannot bypass that rule. The court upheld the reasoning of a Washington federal judge who had already suspended the proclamation in July. That judge wrote that neither immigration law nor the Constitution gives the president or his representatives the sweeping powers claimed in the proclamation and its enforcement directives.
The proclamation had been signed on Trump’s first day in office. In it, he said the situation at the southern border amounted to an “invasion” because of the number of people seeking entry.
What the judges said about the law
The appeals court said Congress adopted the asylum law to give all foreigners “physically present” in the United States the right to request asylum and have their claims individually reviewed. The panel also said that if the government wants to change that system, it must take its case to Congress, the only body authorized to amend the immigration law.
Lee Gelernt, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, called the ruling essential for people fleeing danger who were denied even a hearing under what he described as the administration’s illégal and inhumane decree. The judge who wrote the opinion was J. Michelle Childs, appointed by President Joe Biden. Judge Justin Walker, appointed by Trump, wrote a partial dissent, and Judge Cornelia Pillard, appointed by Barack Obama, also heard the case.
Immediate fallout remains uncertain
The practical consequences of the decision are not clear yet, especially since the Trump administration is expected to use the appeals available to it. The case was brought by 13 people who said they were fleeing persecution in Afghanistan, Ecuador, Cuba, Egypt, Brazil, Turkey and Peru, along with three immigrant-rights organizations. Six of those people had already been deported under the proclamation.
Trump has made the fight against unauthorized immigration a top priority, repeatedly portraying the border situation as a crisis and emphasizing deportations. But that broader campaign has been slowed or blocked by multiple court decisions, many centered on the need for affected people to be able to assert their rights.
What comes next
The next step will likely be a further legal push by the administration, while the ruling stands as a direct challenge to the White House’s attempt to close off asylum at the border. For now, the appeals court has made clear that the asylum framework cannot be rewritten by executive order alone, and that point remains central to the fight over illégal border entries and asylum access.
