A Federal Judge Just Struck Down Trump’s Harsh Restrictions on Asylum

The White House had targeted asylum seekers fleeing gangs and domestic violence.

A woman in Tijuana, Mexico, hands over her documents as her number is called to cross the border and request asylum in the United States.Gregory Bull/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

In a blow to the Trump administration’s efforts to restrict asylum, a federal judge Wednesday struck down new polices that have made it more difficult for people fleeing domestic violence and gangs to seek refuge in the United States.

In the ruling, US District Judge Emmet Sullivan found that the policies violated federal immigration law and ordered the government to return to the United States some asylum seekers who were illegally deported because of the rules.

The policies, first announced this summer, came after former Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a decision saying that victims of domestic and gang violence generally wouldn’t qualify for asylum. In response, US Citizenship and Immigration Services told asylum officers that people escaping these types of violence usually wouldn’t even pass the “credible fear” screening that allows them to make their case in front of a judge. The decision was potentially devastating for tens of thousands of Central American asylum seekers fleeing violence in the region. As my colleague Noah Lanard has reported, immigration lawyers began seeing “overwhelming” numbers of credible-fear denials in the weeks after the new rules went into effect.

The ruling came after a group of asylum seekers sued the Justice Department over the new policies. On Wednesday, Sullivan blocked the government from enforcing those rules in the future, finding that “there is no legal basis for an effective categorical ban on domestic violence and gang-related claims.”

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate