Supreme Court to Review Trump Policy on Denying Asylum Claims

President Donald Trump’s border asylum ban faces a high-stakes test as the Supreme Court agreed on Friday to review whether an declared “invasion” justifies shutting down the refugee system entirely.

The administration asked the justices to overturn a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which held that federal law provides a president discretion in denying asylum claims but he cannot do so categorically.

The underlying lawsuit, tracked on the court’s docket as Mullin v. Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, marks the latest clash over a signature domestic policy implemented on the president’s first day in office.

Supreme Court takes up Trump’s border asylum ban, built on an “invasion” order — Laurence J Hale

The high court will hear arguments over both the legality of the executive order and whether a lower-court judge could grant an order in favor of all asylum seekers rather than just the ones who brought the suit. While the litigation continues, the order remains in place, preventing asylum claims at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The administration argues in its petition that the president has broad authority over asylum claims, which includes shutting down the system entirely. “The proclamation thus lawfully suspends access to asylum, which is a purely discretionary benefit. The court of appeals’ insistence that aliens are entitled to file futile asylum applications elevates empty procedures over substance,” the petition says.

Supreme Court to Decide Trump's Asylum Ban — What Happens Next — The Future Wire

Court filings point to “dramatic” reductions in illegal border crossings, freeing up resources to combat human trafficking and other threats. On the other side of the courtroom, the ACLU and immigrant rights groups defend the D.C. Circuit ruling in their own filing, arguing that Congress mandated the creation of the asylum system.

“May not invent by fiat a new removal system that eviscerates the protections Congress mandated by statute,” lawyers for the immigrant rights groups wrote in defense of the lower court’s reasoning.

Last term the justices ruled in favor of a separate policy dating to the first Trump administration that allowed officials to prevent asylum claims by stopping refugees from actually reaching the U.S. border. A ruling in favor of the refugees could allow the administration to restart that policy and still deny asylum claims.

The justices will likely hear oral arguments and decide the case before the end of the court’s term next June.