Customs, Border and Immigration NewsIn the CourtsIn The NewsUS News

9th Circuit Court Hands Trump Another Big Victory On Asylum Fight

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals handed President Donald Trump a major victory regarding his plan to prohibit most immigrants from applying for asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The San Francisco-based 9th Circuit late Tuesday night rolled back a decision made by a federal judge. U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar, appointed by President Obama, who had reinstated a nationwide ban against Trump’s new asylum policy on Monday, but the appeals court put the policy right back into place the very next day.

Trump’s proposed rule, first introduced in July, denies asylum to immigrants who passed through a “third” country on their way to the U.S. but did not first seek protected status there. For example, a Guatemalan migrant who travels through Mexico and requests asylum as the U.S. southern border would be turned away if he did not first request protection in Mexico.

Tigar slapped down a nationwide injunction against the asylum rule in July. However, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals narrowed the scope of his decision in August, ruling that it could only apply within their court’s jurisdiction, which includes Arizona and California. This meant Trump’s asylum rule could still be implemented at the Texas and New Mexico border.

Tigar on Monday once again placed an injunction against third-country transit bar, finding that the plaintiffs would be subjected to a more expensive and complicated process if the asylum rule is not applied uniformly throughout the country.

“The organizations have presented sufficient evidence that they will suffer organizational and diversion of resources harms unless the rule is enjoined outside of, as well as within, the 9th Circuit,” the judge wrote. “A nationwide injunction is thus ‘necessary to give prevailing parties the relief to which they are entitled.’”

The Trump administration on Monday blasted Tigar’s ruling.

“Immigration and border security policy cannot be run by any single district court judge who decides to issue a nationwide injunction,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in a statement. “This ruling is a gift to human smugglers and traffickers and undermines the rule of law. We previously asked the Supreme Court to set aside the district court’s injunction in its entirety, our request remains pending with the Court, and we look forward to it acting on our request.”

Nevertheless, 9th Circuit again rolled back Tigar’s decision on Tuesday night, ruling that the injunction should only apply to the court’s district — which includes Arizona, California, Hawaii, Montana, Idaho, Nevada, Guam, Alaska, Washington, and Oregon. The administrative order, which was first obtained by Politico, will allow the third-country transit bar to remain in place in the border states of Texas and New Mexico.

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to allow the asylum rule to remain in effect on an interim basis while the court battle continues.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact

Support Conservative Daily News with a small donation via Paypal or credit card that will go towards supporting the news and commentary you've come to appreciate.

Related Articles


  1. I used to believe that the courts were an objective layer of protection for the citizen when put in danger by the over-riding power and finances of the Federal and State governments. We are citizens, and we have the protection of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights…and the courts were there to keep us safe from an increasingly large and powerful bureaucracy. But I NEVER imagined that the courts would become a political entity, and that as such they would be used to protect NON-citizens from our country’s laws. How insane is that…that people who invade out borders (which, since the cross illegally is exactly what they are doing) are then PROTECTED BY OUR COURTS FROM CONSEQUENCES of their illegal activity. Those Judges should be put on trial for failure to abide by their oath of office to protect this country and its citizens. They are a disgrace by any cogent intellectual analysis…and should be shunned as well as removed from office “FOR CAUSE.”

  2. Well said. Thank you. Immediate removal would instantly help our country in many ways, to remain “Our Country”.

Back to top button