Key facts
- Migrants caught crossing the southern border illegally are barred from pursuing asylum claims under the policy.
- The policy also covers migrants at official crossings who lack certain medical or criminal history information.
- The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority and has largely backed Trump on immigration challenges.
- The justices are due to hear arguments on December 9 over deportations to third countries.
- The ACLU and National Immigrant Justice Center say border crossings were already falling before Trump took office.
The US Supreme Court agreed on Friday, November 13, 2026, to consider the legality of President Donald Trump's restrictions on access to asylum at the US-Mexico border, taking up his appeal of a lower court ruling that found he exceeded his authority.
The justices are expected to hear arguments in the case in the coming months and rule by the end of June, Reuters reported. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority and has been largely deferential to Trump in challenges to his immigration policies in his second term.
Trump announced the curbs on January 20, 2025, hours into his second presidential term. Under the policy, migrants caught crossing the southern border illegally are barred from pursuing asylum claims. The prohibition also applies to migrants who arrive at official border crossings and lack certain medical or criminal history information, a requirement that advocates say is often impossible to meet for people fleeing violence. Trump's proclamation said the policy would remain in effect until he determines that the "invasion at the southern border" has ended.
Immigrant rights groups filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of would-be asylum seekers who say they were denied a "credible fear" interview by US immigration officials before facing deportation. Such interviews are meant to determine whether migrants would face persecution in their home country based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion.
A Washington, DC-based federal judge ruled in favor of the groups in July 2025. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in April upheld the ruling but largely agreed to block the decision from taking effect to let the administration appeal to the Supreme Court.
The Trump administration argues it can categorically deny asylum to migrants covered by the order and should not have to accept applications destined to be rejected. Federal attorneys say years-long processing times had previously contributed to an influx of migrants at the southern border as many were released into the country while awaiting a decision.
Immigration attorneys at the American Civil Liberties Union and National Immigrant Justice Center counter that border crossings were already falling before Trump took office. They say his executive order is an attempt to unilaterally "eviscerate" legal protections aimed at protecting people fleeing danger in their home countries.
In June, the court backed the federal government's authority to turn away asylum seekers when officials deem US-Mexico border crossings too overburdened to handle additional claims. In September, it let the administration resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own without offering them the chance to show the harms they may face. The justices are due to hear arguments over the legality of that policy on December 9.