The Trump administration has petitioned the Supreme Court to review a D.C. Circuit ruling that blocked its asylum-shutdown policy, arguing “The D.C. Circuit should not have the last judicial word on this cornerstone of the president’s immigration policy.” This petition follows the D.C. Circuit’s April 24, 2026 decision in RAICES v. Noem, which ruled that the Executive Branch cannot use its “suspension of entry” authority to override asylum laws established by Congress.
What changed
The April 2026 D.C. Circuit decision was a major defeat for a signature component of Trump’s immigration agenda—a proclamation the president issued on his first day back in office that sought to end asylum by any means. The court ruled that the proclamation and the federal rules stemming from it ignored the Immigration and Nationality Act, finding that “barring foreign individuals who are physically present in the United States from applying for asylum and, if they make the statutory showing that they are eligible, from being considered to receive it cannot be squared with the statute.”
The D.C. Circuit panel narrowed the lower court’s order, limiting eligible relief to asylum seekers already on American soil while Trump’s decree is in effect. The Trump administration now seeks Supreme Court review, challenging that ruling’s scope and legal reasoning.
Why it matters
This petition marks a critical juncture for asylum law. The case is expected to be appealed to the Supreme Court, and the Court’s decision will determine whether the President can use proclamation authority under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) to override asylum statutes passed by Congress.
If you represent asylum seekers, this litigation affects:
- Filing strategy: Whether clients at or arriving at the border retain any right to apply for asylum, withholding of removal, or Convention Against Torture protection
- Scope of protection: The INA’s text regarding whether the President can remove individuals under summary removal procedures or suspend their right to apply for asylum, access to withholding of removal, or mandatory procedures for adjudicating Convention Against Torture claims
- Timeline: How long clients may continue applying for asylum before a SCOTUS reversal takes effect
The D.C. Circuit emphasized that the Executive cannot bypass statutory protections, but a Supreme Court reversal would fundamentally alter that framework.
Way forward
- Monitor the docket: Watch https://www.supremecourt.gov for the case caption (likely Trump v. RAICES or similar) and the Court’s decision to grant or deny the cert petition.
- Preserve the record: For asylum clients currently in the U.S., file applications now if there are colorable claims, given the legal uncertainty. Build a detailed factual and legal record for each element of asylum, withholding, and CAT.
- Stay current on parallel litigation: The Trump administration can ask the full D.C. Circuit to review the decision or appeal to the Supreme Court, and other circuits may issue conflicting rulings while SCOTUS review is pending.
- Review client eligibility across protections: If asylum becomes unavailable, advise clients on alternative forms of relief (withholding of removal, CAT, cancellation of removal, etc.) that may not be subject to the same proclamation authority.
Disclaimer
This article is not legal advice. We are a news and reference service, not a law firm. Before relying on this information, consult a licensed immigration attorney in your jurisdiction. Immigration policy and Supreme Court procedure can change without notice. Verify all information against primary sources, including the opinion in RAICES v. Noem (https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov), the Trump administration’s petition, and any SCOTUS order. Procedures and timelines change frequently; this material is current as of the publication date only.