Since then, Border Patrol apprehensions have fallen to the lowest levels in decades after spiking to record highs under the Biden administration.
Advocates for immigrants sued, however, arguing that the administration was violating federal law by rejecting people’s right to seek asylum because they fear persecution based on their political opinion, race or other reasons detailed in federal law.
A lower-court judge had ruled in their favour, but the border has remained largely closed to asylum seekers as the case made its way through the courts.
In its opinion, a three-judge panel on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said Trump’s proclamation was “an unprecedented decision” that brushed off long-standing federal laws outlined by Congress and probably endangered migrants’ lives.
The court wrote: “Denying asylum in one stroke, without any information about the affected individuals, necessarily ignores every risk of persecution they face when forced back to where they came from. The challenged decision thus necessarily denies asylum even to foreign individuals who are sure to face persecution without it.”
The decision was handed down by Judge J Michelle Childs, a Biden appointee who wrote the decision; Judge Cornelia TL Pillard, an Obama nominee; and Judge Justin R Walker, a Trump appointee who wrote a partial dissent.
Advocates for immigrants cheered the ruling, saying officials had turned away people in fear for their lives.
The decision comes weeks after the Supreme Court appeared poised to uphold birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants.
Federal laws have allowed migrants to seek asylum for decades, but the Trump administration contends that asylum is a “loophole” that has allowed thousands of migrants to gain entry into the United States and obtain work permits while they await a hearing that can take years in the backlogged immigration courts.
During his second term, Trump officials have imposed restrictions that have allowed them to expel asylum seekers without a hearing and detain immigrants indefinitely inside the United States.
The appeals court ruling upheld a July decision by US District Judge Randolph D Moss, who ruled that the Trump administration lacked the authority to expel asylum seekers.
Moss said Trump could not invoke emergency presidential powers to deport migrants without allowing them to follow proper procedures to apply for asylum, including undergoing interviews about threats of persecution or torture and, potentially, a hearing in immigration court.
Migrants and advocacy groups filed the lawsuit in February 2025 shortly after Trump issued the proclamation, saying federal law allowed people to apply for asylum as long as they were on US soil, even if they entered illegally.
– The Washington Post
Sign up to Herald Premium Editor’s Picks, delivered straight to your inbox every Friday. Editor-in-Chief Murray Kirkness picks the week’s best features, interviews and investigations. Sign up for Herald Premium here.
