The Supreme Court said on Friday it will take up a legal fight over President Trump's directive suspending access to the asylum system and other legal protections for migrants who illegally cross the southern border between ports of entry. The case is one of several involving Mr. Trump's second-term immigration agenda that the justices will decide in the coming months, with a ruling expected by the end of June or early July.

The directive stems from a proclamation Mr. Trump issued on January 20, 2025, his first day back in the White House, which declared an "invasion" at the southern border. Under one provision, anyone crossing without required paperwork can be removed immediately without the ability to claim asylum. The Department of Homeland Security issued guidance implementing the order, and immigration authorities have since relied on it to summarily remove migrants without letting them apply for asylum.S1S3

Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued in court papers that the president has sweeping authority to bar entry under federal immigration law and constitutional powers, pointing to a provision allowing the president to restrict entry of anyone deemed "detrimental to the interests of the United States." The policy rests, he wrote, on "a commonsense understanding of the President's inherent and delegated powers to exclude aliens."S3

The challenge was brought in February 2025 by three nonprofit groups and 13 people in a class-action lawsuit. Their lawyers at the American Civil Liberties Union argue the ban flouts asylum procedures Congress set out in the Immigration and Nationality Act, including the process for claiming a "credible fear" of torture or persecution. In July 2025, Washington-based U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled the restrictions unlawful, finding that neither the Constitution nor immigration law gave the president authority to replace rules enacted by Congress, and certified a class of everyone covered by the proclamation.S1S3

In April, a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld Moss's ruling, concluding the proclamation and guidance exceeded the president's authority. Even so, the policy has remained in effect while litigation continues, and the appeals court halted its ruling against the Department of Homeland Security pending Supreme Court review. The justices are also weighing related questions, including whether people in the U.S. illegally can be denied a bond hearing.S1S3