Judge blocks Trump's asylum ban at southern border saying he exceeded authority
In a day-one executive order, Trump declared the situation at the southern border constitutes what he called an invasion of America. The president said he was 'suspending the physical entry' of migrants and their ability to seek asylum until he decides it is over.
Federal District Judge Randolph Moss has now blocked that order, writing, 'the President cannot adopt an alternative immigration system, which supplants the statutes that Congress has enacted.'
Moss added that neither the Constitution nor immigration law gives the president 'an extra-statutory, extra-regulatory regime for repatriating or removing individuals from the United States, without an opportunity to apply for asylum' or other humanitarian protections.
The order will take effect July 16, giving the Trump administration two weeks to appeal.
American Civil Liberties Union attorney Lee Gelernt, who argued the merits of the case, called Moss's ruling a 'hugely important decision.'
'Not only will it save the lives of families fleeing grave danger, it reaffirms that the president cannot ignore the laws Congress has passed and the most basic premise of our country's separation of powers,' Gelernt said in a statement.
The Homeland Security Department did not immediately respond to a request but an appeal is likely. The president and his aides have repeatedly attacked court rulings that undermine his policies as judicial overreach.
The ruling comes after illegal border crossings have plummeted. The White House said Wednesday that Border Patrol made 6,070 arrests in June, down 30 percent from May. 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.
Arrests dropped sharply when Mexican officials increased enforcement within its own borders in December 2023 and again when then-President Joe Biden introduced severe asylum restrictions in June 2024. They plunged more after Trump became president in January, deploying thousands of troops to the border under declaration of a national emergency.
Trump and his allies say the asylum system has been abused. They argue that it draws people who know it will take years to adjudicate their claims in the country's backlogged immigration courts during which they can work and live in America.
But supporters argue the right to seek asylum is guaranteed in federal law and international commitments — even for those who cross the border illegally. They say asylum is a vital protection for people fleeing persecution — a protection guaranteed by Congress that even the president doesn't have the authority to ignore.
People seeking asylum must demonstrate a fear of persecution on a fairly narrow grounds of race, religion, nationality, or by belonging to a particular social or political group.
In the executive order, Trump argued the Immigration and Nationality Act gives presidents the authority to suspend entry of any group that they find 'detrimental to the interests of the United States.'
Groups which work with immigrants — the Arizona-based Florence Project, the El Paso, Texas-based Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and the Texas-based RAICES — filed the lawsuit against the government, arguing the president was wrong to equate migrants coming to the southern border with an invasion.
They also argued Trump's proclamation amounted to the president unilaterally overriding '... the immigration laws Congress enacted for the protection of people who face persecution or torture if removed from the United States.'
But the government argued that because both foreign policy and immigration enforcement fall under the executive branch of government, it was entirely under the president's authority to declare an invasion.
'The determination that the United States is facing an invasion is an unreviewable political question,' the government wrote in one argument.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
19 minutes ago
- Times
Trump tariffs' explosive problem: 99% of fireworks made in China
The fireworks industry is fretting that President Trump's tariffs on China will dampen their big blowout next year when Americans celebrate 250 years of independence. Ninety-nine per cent of consumer fireworks and 90 per cent of professional display fireworks come from China. Even the most impressive July 4 displays — on the National Mall in Washington and Macy's show in New York — are reliant on Chinese imports. 'These large signature events — probably 75 to 80 per cent of the product for those shows is manufactured in China,' said Julie Heckman, director of the American Pyrotechnics Association. 'The rest is going to come from Spain, Italy, France and Japan.' Heckman said planned displays in Washington and New York may be 'shortened' in 2026 to cut costs if the 30 per cent tariff remains. She said shows in small American towns could be cancelled altogether, especially if tariffs are returned to the 145 per cent rate imposed by Trump earlier this year. 'If the tariffs increase again to triple digits, small towns aren't going to be able to afford a show,' Heckman said. Fireworks for this year's displays were mostly purchased before Trump's tariffs hit, meaning the shows are largely going ahead as planned. But Lauren Collar, 43, a second-generation firework seller from Missouri, said her family business had to absorb the costs of tariffs this year and predicts shortages in 2026. 'We prepare an order 12 to 18 months in advance,' she said. 'We're uncertain what to do. You could see smaller communities not even shooting fireworks, because they just can't afford it.' Collar said it would take US manufacturers 'a decade' to set up pyrotechnics factories like those in China and even then most of the raw material would be imported and subject to tariffs. 'We're hopeful that the administration will understand our special circumstances and maybe we can get a partial exemption,' she said. Firecrackers were invented in the city of Liuyang, central China, during the Tang dynasty. By stuffing a concoction of charcoal, sulphur and saltpetre into hollowed-out bamboo stalks, Chinese artisans discovered that they could create a satisfying bang. More than 1,200 years later, the province of Hunan still makes fireworks for the rest of the world. For defenders of Trump's protectionist agenda, the simple answer would be to scrap the 1970s health and safety laws that effectively ended small-scale manufacturing in the US, allowing America's firework industry to compete once again with China. But even if these protections were weakened, it is not clear whether Americans would be willing to work in factories adopting Chinese health and safety standards. 'Fireworks are all made by hand. Very little automation is involved,' said Heckman. 'You're dealing with explosive compositions that are highly sensitive to heat, high humidity and friction. It's a very dangerous job.' Fireworks manufacturing is a dangerous business, and accidents are common YANG HUAFENG/CHINA NEWS SERVICE/VCG VIA GETTY IMAGES Earlier this month, nine people were killed in Hunan province by an explosion at a fireworks factory and accidents in China are fairly common. America's pyrotechnicians are hoping Trump's trade war with China will end soon. 'The firework industry is the most patriotic industry in the United States and wants nothing more than to be a significant component of helping America celebrate our 250th anniversary in 2026,' Heckman said. 'But the firework industry needs some relief … in these tariffs to make it happen.'
NBC News
21 minutes ago
- NBC News
Live updates: Trump agenda bill is on the brink of passage in the House
What to know today HOUSE ADVANCES GOP BILL: A massive bill for President Donald Trump's agenda cleared a key hurdle in the House after a group of Republican holdouts changed their votes. SELF-IMPOSED DEADLINE APPROACHING: The House is now debating the bill on the floor before proceeding to final passage. Trump has pushed to sign the bill into law by July 4. TRUMP PRESSURES HOLDOUTS: The president and White House officials have been heavily involved in efforts to sway GOP holdouts. Trump warned them 'MAGA IS NOT HAPPY' on Truth Social. TRUMP'S JULY FOURTH PLANS: Trump is heading to Iowa today to commemorate the July Fourth holiday and announce plans for next year's 250th anniversary celebrations.
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Vatican leak undermines Pope Francis and inflames debate over Latin Mass
The debate surrounding the traditional Latin Mass within the Catholic Church has intensified significantly in the early days of Pope Leo XIV 's pontificate. It follows the alleged leak of Vatican documents that appear to contradict the rationale behind his predecessor Pope Francis 's restrictions on the ancient liturgy. These documents reportedly indicate that a majority of Catholic bishops who participated in a 2020 Vatican survey expressed general satisfaction with the Latin Mass. Crucially, they warned that imposing restrictions would "do more harm than good". The texts, originating from the Vatican's doctrine office, were posted online on Tuesday by Vatican reporter Diane Montagna, who has closely followed the Latin Mass dispute. Neither the Vatican spokesman nor the prefect of the doctrine office immediately responded to requests for comment or confirmation of the documents' authenticity on Wednesday. If verified, the leaked information could place considerable pressure on Pope Leo to address the liturgical divisions that became particularly pronounced during Pope Francis's 12-year papacy, especially within the United States. Leo has consistently stated that his primary aim is to foster unity and reconciliation within the Church, and many conservatives and traditionalists view the Latin Mass controversy as an urgent matter requiring resolution. In one of his most controversial acts, Francis in 2021 reversed Pope Benedict XVI 's signature liturgical legacy and restricted access for ordinary Catholics to the old Latin Mass. The ancient liturgy was celebrated around the world before the modernising reforms of the 1960s Second Vatican Council, which allowed Mass to be celebrated in the vernacular, with the priest facing the pews. Francis said he was cracking down on the spread of the old liturgy because Benedict's decision in 2007 to relax restrictions had become a source of division in the church. Francis said at the time that he was responding to 'the wishes expressed' by bishops around the world who had responded to the Vatican survey, as well as the Vatican doctrine office's own opinion. 'The responses reveal a situation that preoccupies and saddens me, and persuades me of the need to intervene,' Francis wrote at the time. Benedict's relaxation had been "exploited to widen the gaps, reinforce the divergences, and encourage disagreements that injure the church, block her path, and expose her to the peril of division', he said. The documents posted online, however, paint a different picture. They suggest that the majority of bishops who responded to the Vatican survey had a generally favourable view of Benedict's reform and warned that suppressing or weakening it would lead traditionalist Catholics to leave the church and join schismatic groups. They warned any changes 'would seriously damage the life of the church, as it would recreate the tensions that the document had helped to resolve'. The documents include a five-page 'overall assessment' of the survey findings, written by the Vatican's doctrine office, as well as a seven-page compilation of quotes from individual bishops or bishops' conferences. The documents contain some negative and neutral opinions, and say some bishops considered Benedict's reform 'inappropriate, disturbing', dangerous and worthy of suppression. But the Vatican's own assessment said the majority of bishops who responded expressed satisfaction. It cited the rise in religious vocations in traditionalist communities and said young Catholics in particular were drawn to the 'sacredness, seriousness and solemnity of the liturgy'. It is not clear what other evidence, anecdotes or documentation informed Francis's decision to reverse Benedict. But from the very start, Francis was frequently critical of traditionalist Catholics, whom he accused of being navel-gazing retrogrades out of touch with the evangelising mission of the church in the 21st century. The new documents have comforted traditionalists who felt attacked and abandoned by Francis. 'The new revelations confirms that Pope Francis restricted the Traditional Mass at the request of only a minority of bishops, and against the advice of the dicastery in charge of the subject,' Joseph Shaw, of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales, said. 'The majority view of the bishops, that restricting the TLM would cause more harm than good, has sadly been proved correct.' In an email, he said Leo should address the issue 'urgently'.
