WASHINGTON — A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit blocked President Donald Trump's executive order suspending asylum access at the southern border. The panel found that immigration laws give people the right to apply for asylum at the border and that the president cannot circumvent that right.

On Inauguration Day 2025, Trump declared that the situation at the southern border constituted an invasion of America and said he was suspending the physical entry of migrants and their ability to seek asylum until he decides the invasion is over. The executive order also suspended the ability of migrants to ask for asylum. In the order, Trump argued that the Immigration and Nationality Act gives presidents the authority to suspend entry of any group they find "detrimental to the interests of the United States."

The panel concluded that the Immigration and Nationality Act does not authorize the president to remove the plaintiffs under procedures of his own making, suspend their right to apply for asylum, or curtail procedures for adjudicating anti-torture claims. The appeals court opinion stated, "We conclude that the INA's text, structure, and history make clear that in supplying power to suspend entry by Presidential proclamation, Congress did not intend to grant the Executive the expansive removal authority it asserts."

"The power by proclamation to temporarily suspend the entry of specified foreign individuals into the United States does not contain implicit authority to override the INA's mandatory process to summarily remove foreign individuals," wrote Judge J. Michelle Childs.

Judge Walker wrote a partial dissent. He said the law gives immigrants protections against removal to countries where they would be persecuted, but that the administration can issue broad denials of asylum applications. Walker agreed with the majority that the president cannot deport migrants to countries where they will be persecuted or strip them of mandatory procedures that protect against their removal. Judge Cornelia Pillard, who was nominated by President Barack Obama, also heard the case.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt criticized the ruling. "We have liberal judges across the country who are acting against this president for political purposes. They are not acting as true litigators of the law. They are looking at these cases from a political lens," she said. Leavitt said judges should be thanking the president for stopping what she called a "scam" that allowed "tens of millions of illegal aliens" into the country by "fraudulently" claiming asylum. "He is taking actions that are completely within his powers as commander in chief," she said.

"The appellate ruling is essential for those fleeing danger who have been denied even a hearing to present asylum claims under the Trump administration's unlawful and inhumane executive order," said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt.

The Trump administration can ask the full appeals court to reconsider the ruling or appeal to the Supreme Court. The executive order does not take effect until after the court considers any request to reconsider the ruling. The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.