The Supreme Court will consider President Donald Trump’s restrictions on asylum at the southern border.
The Trump administration asked the high court to overturn an appeals court ruling that found his executive order restricting asylum applications was illegal. The restriction has remained in place during the litigation.
The administration argues it can deny any asylum to migrants covered by the order and does not have to accept applications likely to be rejected.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that people have the right to apply for asylum at the border and the executive branch cannot prevent that.
Justices will likely hear the case in 2027 and issue a decision by the end of June.
The case is Mullin v. Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, and was first brought in February 2025.
On the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump said the border surge was an invasion and added he was “suspending the physical entry” of migrants and their ability to seek asylum until he determined the emergency was over.
The American Civil Liberties Union and the National Immigrant Justice Center are representing immigrants in the case. They have contended in court filings that border crossings were falling before Trump took office in January 2025, and that his executive order would unlawfully “eviscerate” legal protections for people fleeing danger in their home countries.
At issue is federal law that allows migrants to seek asylum in the United States, while the executive branch decides who is granted asylum. The administration contends that, in certain countries, people need not fear persecution and an application for asylum would almost certainly be denied.
The Justice Department also argues that the processing time for applications can take years and has contributed to a large influx of immigrants at the southern border, according to The Associated Press.
Historically, asylum cases have been decided on a case-by-case basis. Immigration attorneys who sued to stop the order argue the law doesn’t allow a president to unilaterally halt asylum applications.
The high court will also hear cases about removing illegal immigrants to locations other than their origin country, as well as indefinite detention of illegal immigrants without access to a bond hearing.
This story is developing and will be updated.
