In an order Jan. 20, Trump declared that the situation at the southern border constitutes an invasion of America and that he was “suspending the physical entry” of migrants and their ability to seek asylum until the administration determines the crisis is over.
The White House said Wednesday that the Border Patrol made 6,070 arrests in June, down 30% from May to set a pace for the lowest annual clip since 1966. On June 28, the Border Patrol made only 137 arrests, a sharp contrast to late 2023, when arrests topped 10,000 on the busiest days.
US District Judge Randolph Moss found that the administration overstepped its authority by "bypassing" immigration law to stop alleged asylum-seekers from entering the country.
“The President cannot adopt an alternative immigration system, which supplants the statutes that Congress has enacted,” Moss wrote.
Earlier this year, immigrant rights advocates, including the American Civil Liberties Union, Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project, sued over a presidential proclamation that effectively shut down asylum at the southern border.
The ruling – targeting a signature element of Trump’s agenda – comes as the administration touts low border crossings. Current and former Homeland Security officials have previously cited the clampdown on the US southern border as contributing to a sharp decline in unlawful crossings. In June, the US Border Patrol recorded just over 6,000 encounters, according to federal data.
The judge said that neither immigration statutes nor the Constitution give the president power to unilaterally deny access to asylum for people who have already entered the US, no matter how they arrived. “Nothing in the (Immigration and Nationality Act) or the Constitution grants the President or his delegees the sweeping authority asserted in the Proclamation and implementing guidance,” the ruling states.
The plaintiffs had highlighted that at least two of their clients had already been deported under the policy. While those individuals had expressed a desire to seek asylum, government attorneys argued that they had not established an imminent intent to file claims – raising further questions about who the policy actually applied to and how it was enforced.
CNN reported tensions flared during oral arguments in April in a packed federal courtroom in Washington, DC. DOJ lawyers argued that the proclamation was unreviewable under the immigration statutes in question.
Judge Moss pressed that argument, at one point posing a hypothetical: Would a presidential order to shoot migrants at the border be legally immune from judicial review?
DOJ attorney Drew Ensign (mistakenly we believe) acknowledged that such an order would raise constitutional issues, but hesitated to say what legal limits might apply—drawing a pointed rebuke from the bench.
Moss stayed his decision for 14 days. The administration is expected to appeal.
- Big beautiful bill
- US District Judge Randolph Moss
- Border Crossings
- Asylum
- illegal immigration
- deportations
- federal judge holds
- Gov. Ron DeSantis
- Alligator Alcatraz
- Immigration enforcement
