FILE - A U.S. Border Patrol agent walks past four men being detained after crossing the border through a gap in the walls separating Mexico and the United States, Jan. 23, 2025, in San Diego. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull, File)
FILE - A U.S. Border Patrol agent walks past four men being detained after crossing the border through a gap in the walls separating Mexico and the United States, Jan. 23, 2025, in San Diego. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge Tuesday expressed skepticism over the Trump administration's assertions that its decision to declare an invasion at the U.S.-Mexico border and suspend asylum access was not something courts had the authority to review.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss heard arguments in a Washington courtroom over a rights organizations, which are challenging a key executive order that banned the ability for migrants crossing the southern border to seek protections in the United States.
In the Jan. 20 order, President Donald Trump declared that the situation at the southern border constitutes an invasion of America and that he was “suspending the physical entry†of migrants.
Trump's order asserts that the Immigration and Nationality Act gives presidents the authority to suspend entry of any group that they find “detrimental to the interests of the United States.â€
The government has argued in court that the Republican president's determination that the U.S. is facing an invasion is not subject to court review, calling it “an unreviewable political question†in a filing.
Moss, who was nominated by Democratic President Barack Obama, repeatedly questioned the government's lawyer on that point.
At one point, he posed a hypothetical question about whether the president — upset with northerners taking up residence in sunny Florida where he has a home — could declare their presence an invasion.
At another point, he asked, “Is there just never any judicial review?â€
Advocates say the right to request asylum is enshrined in the country’s immigration laws and that denying migrants that right puts people fleeing war or persecution in grave danger.
Critics say relatively few people coming to America seeking asylum actually end up qualifying and that it takes years for overloaded immigration courts to come to a determination on such requests. People seeking asylum must demonstrate a fear of persecution at home on a fairly narrow grounds of race, religion, nationality or by belonging to a particular social or political group.
In the lawsuit, the migrant rights groups argued that immigration “even at elevated levels†does not constitute an invasion and noted that the number of people entering the country between the ports of entry had fallen since August 2020.
The groups are asking the judge to declare Trump's order unlawful and keep him from enforcing it. The government has asked the judge to dismiss the organizations' motion.
Moss asked for more written arguments on specific legal questions before making his ruling.
