Supreme Court agrees to decide whether Trump can ban asylum claims at the border

The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide whether President Donald Trump has the authority to ban asylum claims at the southern border. A federal judge ruled the policy unlawful, but it has stayed in effect while the case continues ¹.

The court's ruling is due before the end of June. NBC News reports it will be the final word on the administration's assertion of presidential power over people trying to claim asylum at the border, even though federal law enacted by Congress lays out a procedure for doing so ¹.

What the policy does

The ban comes from a proclamation Trump issued Jan. 20, 2025, that declared an "invasion" on the southern border. Under one provision, anyone who crosses without required paperwork can be removed immediately and cannot claim asylum ¹.

Immigration hawks have long complained that people who enter illegally apply for asylum to stay in the country while their cases are processed, even when their claims are not valid ¹.

From Channel GOPTrump dodges rigged-election question, calls Massie loserDonald Trump · 526 plays · captioned, with the source named

The two sides

Solicitor General D. John Sauer, who argues the administration's cases before the court, says the president has sweeping power to bar entry under immigration law and the Constitution. He points to a provision that lets the president restrict entry when he deems it "detrimental to the interests of the United States" ¹.

rests on a commonsense understanding of the President’s inherent and delegated powers to exclude aliens

The challengers include 13 unnamed plaintiffs and three immigration groups: the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, the Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project. Their American Civil Liberties Union lawyers say the ban ignores the asylum rules in the Immigration and Nationality Act, under which migrants can argue they have a "credible fear" of torture or persecution if sent home ¹.

The ACLU says the case was brought for a nationwide class of asylum seekers ².

How the case got here

In July 2025, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled against the administration ¹.

grants the president ... authority to replace the comprehensive rules and procedures set forth in the INA.

On April 24, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled the proclamation unlawful ². NBC reports the appeals court upheld Moss's ruling that month, and the administration then asked the Supreme Court to step in ¹.

Part of a larger fight

This is the third significant Trump immigration case before the court. One concerns deporting immigrants to "third countries" they have no previous connection to. Another concerns the administration's attempt to detain indefinitely thousands of people in deportation proceedings, a break from earlier administrations, which released them while their cases were decided ¹.

The court has delivered mixed results. It ruled in the president's favor on border authority in June. That same month it blocked his executive order seeking to limit birthright citizenship, the constitutional guarantee that children born in the U.S. are citizens ¹.

That matters because the case is about more than one border policy. It asks whether a president can set up his own removal system in place of the one Congress passed. The lower courts have so far said no, and the Supreme Court will now decide whether that holds ¹².

The Record

1. Jan 20, 2025Trump issues a proclamation declaring an "invasion" at the southern border and barring asylum claims for people who cross without required paperwork ¹.
2. Jul 2, 2025A federal court blocks the administration's effort; Judge Randolph Moss rules against it, but the policy stays in effect during litigation ¹².
3. Apr 24, 2026The D.C. Circuit rules the proclamation is unlawful ².
4. Nov 13, 2026The Supreme Court agrees to decide the case, with a ruling due before the end of June ¹.

Free to reprint Republish this story on your site or in your newsletter

Any site, blog or newsletter may run this story free of charge. Keep the credit line and its link to the original, do not sell it, and edit only for length or house style (the full terms). Photos carry their own licenses, noted under each photo on this page, so use the text alone unless a credit says otherwise.

<h2>Supreme Court agrees to decide whether Trump can ban asylum claims at the border</h2> <p><em>By The GOP Files National Desk. This article first appeared on <a href="https://thegopfiles.com/story/supreme-court-agrees-to-decide-whether-trump-can-ban-asylum-claims-at-the-border">The GOP Files</a> on Friday, November 13, 2026.</em></p> <p>The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide whether President Donald Trump has the authority to ban asylum claims at the southern border. A federal judge ruled the policy unlawful, but it has stayed in effect while the case continues .</p> <p>The court&#39;s ruling is due before the end of June. NBC News reports it will be the final word on the administration&#39;s assertion of presidential power over people trying to claim asylum at the border, even though federal law enacted by Congress lays out a procedure for doing so .</p> <h2>What the policy does</h2> <p>The ban comes from a proclamation Trump issued Jan. 20, 2025, that declared an &quot;invasion&quot; on the southern border. Under one provision, anyone who crosses without required paperwork can be removed immediately and cannot claim asylum .</p> <p>Immigration hawks have long complained that people who enter illegally apply for asylum to stay in the country while their cases are processed, even when their claims are not valid .</p> <h2>The two sides</h2> <p>Solicitor General D. John Sauer, who argues the administration&#39;s cases before the court, says the president has sweeping power to bar entry under immigration law and the Constitution. He points to a provision that lets the president restrict entry when he deems it &quot;detrimental to the interests of the United States&quot; .</p> <blockquote><p>rests on a commonsense understanding of the President’s inherent and delegated powers to exclude aliens</p><p>&mdash; D. John Sauer, U.S. Solicitor General, Trump administration</p></blockquote> <p>The challengers include 13 unnamed plaintiffs and three immigration groups: the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, the Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and the Florence Immigrant &amp; Refugee Rights Project. Their American Civil Liberties Union lawyers say the ban ignores the asylum rules in the Immigration and Nationality Act, under which migrants can argue they have a &quot;credible fear&quot; of torture or persecution if sent home .</p> <p>The ACLU says the case was brought for a nationwide class of asylum seekers .</p> <h2>How the case got here</h2> <p>In July 2025, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled against the administration .</p> <blockquote><p>grants the president ... authority to replace the comprehensive rules and procedures set forth in the INA.</p><p>&mdash; Randolph Moss, U.S. District Judge, District of Columbia</p></blockquote> <p>On April 24, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled the proclamation unlawful . NBC reports the appeals court upheld Moss&#39;s ruling that month, and the administration then asked the Supreme Court to step in .</p> <h2>Part of a larger fight</h2> <p>This is the third significant Trump immigration case before the court. One concerns deporting immigrants to &quot;third countries&quot; they have no previous connection to. Another concerns the administration&#39;s attempt to detain indefinitely thousands of people in deportation proceedings, a break from earlier administrations, which released them while their cases were decided .</p> <p>The court has delivered mixed results. It ruled in the president&#39;s favor on border authority in June. That same month it blocked his executive order seeking to limit birthright citizenship, the constitutional guarantee that children born in the U.S. are citizens .</p> <p>That matters because the case is about more than one border policy. It asks whether a president can set up his own removal system in place of the one Congress passed. The lower courts have so far said no, and the Supreme Court will now decide whether that holds .</p> <p><em>Read the original, with every source linked, at <a href="https://thegopfiles.com/story/supreme-court-agrees-to-decide-whether-trump-can-ban-asylum-claims-at-the-border">thegopfiles.com</a>. Republished under The GOP Files' <a href="https://thegopfiles.com/republish">free republishing terms</a>.</em></p> <img src="https://thegopfiles.com/api/rp/supreme-court-agrees-to-decide-whether-trump-can-ban-asylum-claims-at-the-border.gif" alt="" width="1" height="1" style="border:0;width:1px;height:1px">

Copy the HTML Paste it into your editor's HTML view. The one-pixel image at the end tells our newsroom the story ran; it stores no reader data.

Sources

1. NBC News, “Supreme Court to rule on Trump’s asylum ban” (2026-11-13). nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-takes-trump
2. ACLU, “RAICES v. Mullin (case page)” (2026-04-24). aclu.org/cases/raices-v-mullin

Found an error? Tell the newsroom. Corrections are noted at the top of the story.