WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has granted review in Mullin v. RAICES, a challenge to President Trump’s proclamation completely shutting down asylum at the border.

The American Civil Liberties Union, National Immigrant Justice Center, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, Texas Civil Rights Project, ACLU of the District of Columbia, and ACLU of Texas brought the federal lawsuit on behalf of a nationwide class of people barred from seeking protection in the United States under this proclamation, as well as three immigrant legal service providers, Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES), Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, and the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project.

The federal district court in Washington, D.C. and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit both rejected the Trump administration’s unlawful proclamation barring people from seeking asylum by invoking Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act and citing a nonexistent “invasion.”

The lower federal courts ruled in the plaintiffs’ favor because the Trump administration’s action is contrary to laws enacted by Congress to ensure that people receive an opportunity to have their asylum claims heard.

The Supreme Court granted the government’s petition to hear the case, and argument is expected in spring 2027.

The following is reaction to the Supreme Court decision to hear the case:

“The president does not have the right to unilaterally override the protections Congress has afforded those fleeing danger,” said Lee Gelernt, lead counsel and deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. “The courts are right to reject this unprecedented power grab that would put countless lives in danger. We look forward to making our case before the Supreme Court.”

“The plaintiffs in this case fled persecution and torture, including political imprisonment and threats from the Taliban. Yet, the Trump administration refused to honor its obligation to consider them for asylum,” said Keren Zwick, executive director of the National Immigrant Justice Center. “Some plaintiffs were removed to third countries and then pushed back to the very place they fled; others faced prolonged detention without access to legal due process. Even after the lower courts rejected the president’s proclamation, the administration has continued to block access to asylum at the U.S. border. This vicious attack on due process and human rights has put thousands of lives in danger. We are honored to represent these asylum seekers, and their advocates, as this important case proceeds.”

Be the first to know, sign up for our newsletter, absolutely free of course.

“For nearly two years, the Trump administration’s unlawful asylum shutdown has deprived people seeking safety of their rights, placing vulnerable families, children, and adults in harm’s way,” said Melissa Crow, director of litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS). “Refugees fleeing persecution and torture have been denied access to the asylum process and deported to danger. The lower courts got it right: The president cannot unilaterally rewrite our immigration laws and defy the will of Congress to get its way. It is now up to the Supreme Court to decide whether it will uphold the rule of law or bend to the administration’s agenda.”