Trump Asylum Ban
“Defendants unlawfully promulgated the rule without complying with the APA’s notice-and-comment requirements,” Kelly wrote in his opinion, concluding that the Court didn’t need to rule on other claims about the validity of the rule to vacate it.
In addition to striking down the rule because it violated the APA, Judge Kelly also denied the government's request to stay his order pending appeal, meaning he has blocked a policy that would have automatically denied asylum to a population of migrants that the U.S. had long allowed to at least file asylum applications once they reached U.S. soil.
Judge Kelly's ruling appears to clash with the Supreme Court of the United States, which in September of 2019 issued an opinion permitting the asylum ban to go into effect while challenges over its legality are being litigated in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. However, it is consistent with several recent Supreme Court precedents with respect to the Administration's rulemaking. Last year, the Supreme Court ruled that the Administration’s effort to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census violated the APA because of what it said was the faulty reason officials cited for the decision. And late last month, the Court stopped the Administration from rescinding the DACA program because it failed to follow the APA.
On its face, it would appear that unless the Administration appeals the ruling and obtains a stay of it, pending appeal, the Administration will have to permit Central American asylum seekers to enter the United States and seek asylum until it completes a new rulemaking process that complies with the APA. However, the Administration has taken a number of other overlapping actions and implemented a number of overlapping policies with respect to the border and asylum that have effectively sealed the U.S. border.to asylum seekers.