On Friday, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled against President Donald Trump's executive order that aimed to suspend asylum access at the southern border, a move central to his migration crackdown strategy. The three-judge panel determined that immigration laws explicitly allow individuals to apply for asylum at the border, and the president cannot bypass this legal right. Judge J. Michelle Childs, who authored the opinion, emphasized that the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) does not grant the president the authority to unilaterally suspend asylum applications or remove individuals without due process. The ruling comes after Trump declared an 'invasion' at the border on Inauguration Day 2025, leading to his controversial order. The White House has indicated plans to appeal the decision, asserting that Trump acted within his powers as commander in chief. Advocates for migrants welcomed the ruling, stating it reaffirms the legal protections for those fleeing danger. The decision is seen as a crucial moment for asylum seekers, particularly as many remain trapped in precarious situations in Mexico while awaiting the opportunity to seek refuge in the US.