Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Trump Asylum Ban Case; Alito Comments on Courts and Congress

The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to decide whether President Donald Trump has the authority to ban asylum claims at the southern border, with a ruling due before the end of June. The decision will be the final word on the administration's claim of presidential power over asylum seekers, despite a federal law that sets a procedure for such claims.

Trump's Jan. 20, 2025 proclamation declared an invasion at the border and allows anyone crossing without required paperwork to be removed immediately, with no chance to claim asylum. A federal judge ruled the policy unlawful, but it has stayed in effect during litigation. The administration wants the justices to overturn the lower-court rulings, and Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote that the president has sweeping authority to bar entry. It is the third major Trump immigration case before the court. Separately, the court agreed to hear Robinhood's challenge to a class-action suit over interim financial data left out of its 2021 IPO. On Thursday, Justice Samuel Alito told a Federalist Society dinner that “Congress can turn off the lights at the Supreme Court and stop everything from happening.”

Left-leaning outlets frame the asylum case around presidential power. NBC News calls it a ban and notes the lower-court finding of unlawfulness. The New Republic casts Alito's remarks as an attack on lower-court judges who ruled against Trump, noting he named no rulings and calling his defunding warning hyperbolic. Right-leaning outlets are briefer on asylum. The Daily Signal describes restrictions and gives the administration's argument. Just the News leads with Alito's warning about judicial independence and quotes him at length. The sides agree on the core facts; they differ on whether Alito's remarks are a grievance or a warning. CNBC, an alternative source, covers only the Robinhood case.