An attempt by President Trump to categorically deny asylum claims to people crossing the southern border was ruled unlawful by a federal appeals court on Friday. In a 2-to-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld an earlier ruling by a district court judge.
Existing immigration law “does not allow the president to remove plaintiffs under summary removal procedures of his own making,” Judge J. Michelle Childs wrote for the majority.
Much of the earlier ruling, by Judge Randolph D. Moss of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, had been temporarily set aside by an appeals panel in August. That meant that Mr. Trump’s proclamation declaring an “invasion” and effectively closing the border to asylum seekers had still largely been in force.
Friday’s ruling that Mr. Trump’s policy went beyond statutory authority removed a key legal obstacle to processing new asylum applications. It will not take effect for seven days, which gives the administration time to ask for the case to be reheard by a larger appellate panel, or to appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is already considering a separate case over whether asylum seekers can be turned back at the border before they have a chance to file an asylum claim.
Lee Gelernt, an A.C.L.U. attorney who argued the appeal, praised the ruling, saying it made clear “that the president lacks the power to unilaterally override laws passed by Congress.” The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
