Top News

A federal court found the US president cannot categorically deny asylum to migrants who cross the US-Mexico border. The US government can appeal the ruling.A federal judge on Wednesday blocked US President Donald Trump's asylum ban at the US-Mexico border. US District Judge Randolph Moss ruled that Trump overstepped his authority by declaring illegal immigration an emergency and bypassing existing legal processes. However, he stayed the ruling for two weeks to give the government time to appeal. Trump exceeded his authority, judge finds As part of his immigration crackdown, Trump declared that the situation at the southern border constituted an invasion of the United States. He signed a proclamation on the day of his inauguration, saying he was "suspending the physical entry" of migrants and their ability to seek asylum until he decides the situation is over. But Moss found that Trump had exceeded his authority in suspending the right to apply for asylum. "Nothing in the [Immigration and Nationality Act] or the Constitution grants the president or his delegates the sweeping authority asserted in the proclamation and implementing guidance," Moss wrote in his ruling. In his 128-page opinion, he added that the president was not granted "an extra-statutory, extra-regulatory regime for repatriating or removing individuals from the United States, without an opportunity to apply for asylum" or other humanitarian protections. Illegal border crossings have dropped significantly On Wednesday, the White House announced that Border Patrol made 6,070 arrests in June. This number is down 30% from May and set a pace for the lowest annual total since 1966. The ruling is a setback for Trump, who regained the White House by promising a sweeping immigration crackdown. Trump and his allies argue that the asylum system has been abused. The American Civil Liberties Union brought the challenge to Trump's asylum ban in February on behalf of three advocacy groups and migrants denied access to asylum, arguing that the broad ban violated US laws and international treaties. "The decision means there will be protection for those fleeing horrific danger and that the president cannot ignore laws passed by Congress simply by claiming that asylum-seekers are engaged in an invasion," said Lee Gelernt, who argued the case for the ACLU. There was no immediate reaction from the White House, the Justice Department, or the Department of Homeland Security. Edited by: Sean Sinico