Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday said it will take up a legal fight over President Trump’s directive suspending access to the asylum system and other legal protections for migrants illegally crossing the southern border.
The case is the latest involving Mr. Trump’s second-term immigration agenda that the Supreme Court will decide in the coming months. The justices are also considering the legality of removing migrants to third countries and indefinitely detaining immigrants in the U.S. illegally without access to a bond hearing.
A decision in the cases is expected by the end of June or early July.
Mr. Trump has made cracking down on immigration a cornerstone of his second term, which has seen enhanced enforcement operations in major U.S. cities and mass deportations of people in the U.S. illegally. Unlawful crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border have reached historic lows and immigration detentions have set new highs under the president’s second administration.
As part of his efforts to curb illegal immigration into the U.S., Mr. Trump issued a proclamation on his first day back in the White House claiming that there is an “invasion” at the southern border. The president suspended the entry of migrants crossing the southern border between ports of entry and barred them from seeking asylum and other legal protections that would allow them to remain in the U.S.
The Department of Homeland Security then issued guidance implementing the president’s directive. Immigration authorities have since relied on the policy to summarily remove migrants entering the country illegally without allowing them to apply for asylum.
In February 2025, three nonprofit groups and 13 people 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 Trump administration’s asylum restrictions and found them unlawful.
The judge, Randolph Moss, found that neither the Constitution nor federal immigration law gave the Trump administration the authority to replace the rules and procedures enacted by Congress. The judge also said that immigration law does not give the president the unilateral authority to limit the rights of noncitizens in the U.S. to apply for asylum or other protections.
As part of his decision, Moss certified a class of all people covered by the president’s proclamation and blocked the Trump administration from enforcing the directive against them.
The Trump administration appealed, and in April, a divided three-judge panel upheld the district court’s decision and ruled that the proclamation and guidance exceeded the president’s authority. The two judges in the majority also found that the president does not have the power to suspend migrants’ right to apply for asylum or deport migrants under his administration’s new summary removal proceedings.
The Trump administration has continued to enforce its policy suspending access to asylum while legal proceedings have continued, and the D.C. Circuit halted its ruling against DHS pending Supreme Court review.
