Federal Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s Asylum Ban

On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a 2-1 decision overturning President Donald Trump’s proclamation that barred migrants at the U.S.–Mexico border from filing asylum claims. The majority said the order violated the Immigration and Nationality Act, which grants a right to asylum for individuals physically present in the United States, and held that changes require Congress.

The Hill

The decision affirms a July 2025 ruling by District Judge Randolph Moss that the president exceeded authority in limiting asylum for people fleeing persecution. The D.C. Circuit paused Moss’s judgment, then lifted the stay while narrowing it to allow the ban on asylum applications but not to strip migrants of other protections against torture.

The Hill

The majority opinion was written by Judges Michelle Childs (Biden appointee) and Nina Pillard (Obama appointee). The dissent was authored by Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee. District Judge Randolph Moss, whose ruling was upheld, was also appointed by Obama.

The Hill

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News that the judges were biased and that the president’s border measures were fully within his constitutional authority as commander-in-chief. The court’s opinion stressed that amendments to the asylum statute must be enacted by Congress, underscoring the separation of powers.

The Hill

Leavitt framed the ruling as evidence of a pattern of “liberal judges” opposing the administration’s immigration policy. Judge Walker’s dissent argued the proclamation fell within the president’s executive authority, highlighting an intra-court split over presidential power.

The Hill

• “Congress enacted the asylum statute, with narrow exceptions specified by statute, to grant all foreign individuals ‘physically present’ in the United States a right to apply for asylum and have their individual applications adjudicated,” — Majority Opinion, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

The Hill

• “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 [Immigration and Nationality Act]: Congress.” — Majority Opinion, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

The Hill

• “Unfortunately, while it’s newsy, it’s unsurprising to me. We have liberal judges across the country who are acting against this president for political purposes,” — Karoline Leavitt, White House Press Secretary

The Hill

• “Everything that this president has done and signed with respect to the southern border is completely within his powers as commander in chief, and these judges should be thanking the president of the United States for ending the border invasion that was allowed by the previous administration.” — Karoline Leavitt, White House Press Secretary

The Hill

The decision blocks the proclamation signed by President Trump on his second inauguration day, leaving the asylum statute unchanged.

The Hill