Washington — The Supreme Court said Friday that it will hear a legal challenge to President Trump’s directive suspending access to the asylum system and other protections for migrants who cross the southern border illegally.
The case is the latest dispute over Mr. Trump’s second-term immigration policies to reach the justices, who are expected to issue rulings in the coming months. The Supreme Court is also weighing whether the administration can remove migrants to third countries and detain immigrants indefinitely in the United States without providing them with bond hearings.
Rulings in the cases are expected by the end of June or early July.
Mr. Trump has made immigration enforcement a central focus of his second term. His administration has expanded operations in major U.S. cities and carried out mass deportations of people living in the country illegally. Meanwhile, unauthorized crossings along the U.S.-Mexico border have fallen to historic lows, while immigration detentions have reached record levels under his second administration.
On his first day back in the White House, Mr. Trump issued a proclamation declaring that an “invasion” was taking place at the southern border. The order suspended the entry of migrants crossing between ports of entry and prohibited them from applying for asylum and other forms of legal protection that could allow them to remain in the United States.
The Department of Homeland Security later issued guidance to implement the proclamation. Since then, immigration authorities have relied on the policy to summarily remove migrants who enter the country illegally without giving them an opportunity to seek asylum.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE: Trump Shares Claims of ‘Unusual Patterns’ in Midterm Elections
In February 2025, three nonprofit organizations and 13 individuals filed a class-action lawsuit challenging Mr. Trump’s proclamation and the administration’s guidance. Several months later, a federal judge in Washington set aside the asylum restrictions, ruling that they were unlawful.
Judge Randolph Moss ruled that neither the Constitution nor federal immigration law authorized the Trump administration to replace procedures established by Congress. He also concluded that immigration law does not grant the president unilateral power to restrict noncitizens’ ability to apply for asylum or other protections in the United States.
Moss certified a class consisting of everyone covered by the president’s proclamation and barred the administration from enforcing the directive against them.
The Trump administration appealed. In April, a divided three-judge panel upheld the district court’s ruling, finding that the proclamation and accompanying guidance exceeded the president’s authority. The two judges in the majority also said the president could not suspend migrants’ statutory right to apply for asylum or deport them through the administration’s new summary removal procedures.
The administration has continued enforcing its asylum suspension while the litigation proceeds. The D.C. Circuit later paused enforcement of its ruling against the Department of Homeland Security pending the Supreme Court’s review.
