A federal judge ruled Wednesday that President Donald Trump’s order to halt asylum claims at the southern border was unlawful; however, the enforcement of the decision will be delayed until July 16 to allow time for the administration to appeal.
Trump’s executive order, issued January 20, labeled the southern border crisis as an “invasion of America” and declared he was “suspending the physical entry” of migrants and their right to claim asylum until he deemed the situation resolved, according to the Associated Press.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss wrote that neither immigration law nor the Constitution grants 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 seek other humanitarian protections.
Federal judge Randolph Moss has ruled that President Trump’s declaration of an invasion at the Southern border, which successfully reduced illegal crossings by 99.9%, was illegal and must be rescinded. The invasion, he says, must be allowed to resume. It turns out that even if… pic.twitter.com/zeVlFL1jlr
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) July 2, 2025
Although the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately comment, an appeal is anticipated. Trump and his allies have frequently criticized legal rulings that thwart his policies as overreach by the judiciary.
The court decision follows a steep decline in illegal border crossings.
According to the White House, Border Patrol made 6,070 arrests in June — a 30% drop from May — putting the country on track for its lowest annual total since 1966.
On June 28 alone, there were just 137 arrests, a dramatic shift from late 2023 when daily apprehensions exceeded 10,000.
Enforcement stepped up after Mexico increased its own border control efforts in December 2023.
Arrests dropped further when former President Joe Biden imposed strict asylum limits in June 2024 and again after Trump redeployed troops to the border under a national emergency earlier this year.
Trump and his supporters argue that the asylum process is exploited by those seeking to remain in the U.S. while cases are processed.
Critics counter that asylum is a legal right enshrined in both domestic and international law, offering vital protection for people fleeing persecution based on race, religion, nationality, or group affiliation.
Immigrant advocacy groups — including the Florence Project, Las Americas, and RAICES — sued, asserting that Trump wrongly equated asylum-seekers with invaders and bypassed congressional immigration protections.
U.S. District Court Judge Randolph Daniel Moss (Obama appointed) BLOCKS President Trump’s executive order that BANNED migrants who illegal crossed into the U.S. from seeking asylum.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi: “A rogue district court judge is already trying to circumvent… pic.twitter.com/w2DzMLjlzt
— RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) July 2, 2025
The government insists Trump had the authority to act. “The determination that the United States is facing an invasion is an unreviewable political question,” its brief stated.
The content in this feed is part of a partnership with IJR.com. While we strive for accuracy, the information presented here may change or be updated. This content does not constitute professional advice or endorsement.
