We are Americans, and Americans Don’t Give Up

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court today ruled that President Trump’s Day 1 proclamation aimed at completely shutting down asylum at the border is unlawful. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Trump administration’s claim that the “212(f)” proclamation allowed the president to summarily deport asylum seekers who cross the border without allowing them to seek protection as required by Congress. The proclamation had falsely cited an “invasion” as the pretext for denying asylum protections for people who are at risk of persecution. The appeals court held that the government cannot subvert the laws Congress passed with extra-statutory procedures to block people from seeking asylum, which puts tens of thousands of lives at risk. The American Civil Liberties Union, National Immigrant Justice Center, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, Texas Civil Rights Project, ACLU of the District of Columbia, and ACLU of Texas brought the federal lawsuit on behalf of Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services, Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, and the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project, which provide legal services to asylum seekers, and a nationwide class of people barred from seeking protection in the United States under this proclamation. The following is reaction to today’s ruling: “This decision puts an end to the inhumane Trump policy of sending people, including families with little children, back to horrific danger without even a hearing,” said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who argued the appeal. “The court made clear that the president does not have the unilateral power to wipe away all of the asylum laws enacted by Congress.” “The circuit court reaffirmed our conviction that a president cannot unilaterally eliminate the right to seek asylum by executive order. We hope that the U.S. government remembers its obligation to consider applications for refugee protections and recommits to upholding the basic rights of people fleeing persecution,” said Keren Zwick, director of litigation at the National Immigrant Justice Center. “Today marks a victory for the right of people to move freely across borders. It’s a moment to celebrate the connections we have with others, regardless of artificial boundaries,” said Daniel Hatoum, senior supervising attorney at the Texas Civil Rights Project. “Today's D.C. Circuit ruling affirms that capricious actions by the president cannot supplant the rule of law in the United States. The right to seek asylum is firmly grounded in U.S. law and binding international obligations. This decision is a meaningful victory for our clients, who have been denied access to protection under policies deliberately designed to shut the door on people fleeing violence and persecution — policies that are inconsistent with those legal standards and basic due process. As organizational plaintiffs in this case, we fought this because in border communities like ours, we see the human consequences every day. Individuals and families arriving here are seeking lawful protection and the opportunity to live and work safely,” said Nicolas Palazzo, director of advocacy and legal services of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center. “Today’s decision is a win for every person who seeks safety and protection at our borders,” said Laura St. John, the legal director for the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project. “The right to seek asylum in the U.S. is protected by law, and no unilateral executive action can nullify the laws and system Congress has created. We are relieved to see the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirm these principles. We call on the U.S. government to immediately move to uphold its obligation to people seeking protection and restart asylum processing at once.” “Since January of last year, the government has used the proclamation to implement a near-total shutdown of asylum processing, slamming the door on vulnerable families, children, and adults seeking refuge,” said Melissa Crow, director of litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS). “As the court rightly concluded, U.S. law is clear: People seeking safety have a legal right to apply for asylum. The government cannot wield racist, baseless claims of an ‘invasion’ to override Congress and deprive them of that right.” “The D.C. Circuit's decision today confirms what we have long known to be true: U.S. immigration policy, as codified by law, does not grant the president unchecked, autocratic power to override Congress,” said Faisal Al-Juburi, co-chief executive officer at RAICES. “The rule of law is fundamental to our nation, and an independent judiciary remains essential to upholding this principle.” “This ruling confirms that the president cannot invent false pretenses to eliminate life-or-death rights for refugees seeking asylum,” said Arthur Spitzer, senior counsel at the ACLU of the District of Columbia. “Thankfully, the courts still function in a fact-based world and rejected the president's false claims of invasion.” The ruling is here. Case background is here.

NEW YORK — More than 120 civil society groups issued a travel advisory today warning that fans, players, journalists and other visitors traveling for the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup could be at risk of serious rights violations as the Trump administration doubles down on its draconian immigration and anti-human rights agenda. In their advisory, the groups state that, in the absence of meaningful action from FIFA, host cities or the Trump administration, people traveling to the United States and domestically could be at risk of: Arbitrary denial of entry and risk of arrest, detention and/or deportation Expanded restrictions and limitation on travel and entry to the U.S. Invasive social media screening and searches of electronic devices Violent and unconstitutional immigration enforcement, including racial profiling Suppression of speech and protest and increased surveillance Cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment – and even death – while in ICE detention or custody The advisory also encourages travelers, including thousands of journalists expected to cover the games, to take steps to protect themselves, such as securing electronic devices by removing facial recognition capabilities when traveling; alerting family, friends or trusted colleagues of plans to travel to and within the U.S.; and consulting other “Know Your Rights” resources. The 2026 World Cup, which will be held between June 11 and July 19, could bring as many as 10 million visitors to 11 U.S. cities this summer, making it the largest sporting event in history. In February 2026 – just days after ICE agents shot and killed Nicole Good in Minneapolis – ICE said agents would play a “key part” in the security at this summer’s tournament, raising concerns of potential ICE violence and increased enforcement activity in host cities. Quotes from signatories are as follows: “FIFA has been paying lip service to human rights while cozying up with the Trump administration, putting millions of people at risk of being harmed and their basic rights violated,” said Jamil Dakwar, ACLU human rights program director. “The Trump administration’s abusive actions continue to threaten our communities, tourists, and fans alike – and it’s past time that FIFA use its leverage to push for meaningful policy changes and binding assurances that will make people feel safe to travel and enjoy the games.” “The specter of immigration enforcement this summer has become the leading concern among grassroots organizations across host cities. Irrespective of their focus area – housing, labor, immigration – this issue has become a galvanizing topic. With less than two months to go, we are still waiting for public commitments from FIFA and host city organizers about plans to protect residents, workers, and visitors. The silence has been deafening,” said Jennifer Li, who leads Dignity 2026, a national coalition working with grassroots groups in host cities, which counts multiple signatories among its members. “We are excited for fellow supporters to experience the World Cup and our North American soccer culture, but there are still too many unknowns across host cities. This advisory is about urging caution so that fans can arrive prepared, stay safe, and avoid preventable issues that could also place a strain on local communities and resources,” said Bailey Brown, President of the Independent Supporters Council North America. “Fans, journalists and others traveling to the United States for the 2026 FIFA World Cup risk encountering a deeply troubling human rights landscape, shaped by the Trump administration’s racist immigration policies, mass detention and deportation, and attacks on freedom of expression and peaceful protest,” said Daniel Noroña, Americas Advocacy Director with Amnesty International USA. “If the U.S. government and host cities cannot guarantee the rights and safety of all, this tournament risks falling far short of FIFA’s promise of a safe, welcoming, and inclusive event, for traveling fans, journalists, players and people already living in the U.S. alike." The full travel advisory is available here: https://www.aclu.org/documents/2026-world-cup-travel-advisory

WASHINGTON – House Representatives today passed H.R. 1689, a bill that would provide a three-year period of protection and work authorization for Haitians. The bill is the first pro-immigrant bill to pass Congress this legislative session and signals that elected officials across the aisle are rejecting the Trump administration’s extreme anti-immigrant policies, including the gutting of humanitarian protections for people fleeing political turmoil, violence, and humanitarian catastrophe. The vote also comes as Congress prepares to vote on a reconciliation bill in an attempt to strong-arm further funding for ICE and Border Patrol. Notably, H.R. 1689 would protect hundreds of thousands of Haitian nationals at risk of deportation after the Trump administration illegally terminated Temporary Protected Status (TPS), a statute enacted by Congress that has protected 350,000 Haitians who have lived in and contributed to communities nationwide, in some cases for decades. In response to this news, Naureen Shah, director of policy and government affairs at the American Civil Liberties Union, had the following reaction: “Today’s bipartisan passage is a major win for immigrants’ rights and is a clear signal that members of Congress are breaking from the status quo to reject the Trump administration’s unlawful and dangerous agenda to end humanitarian protections and deport our immigrant neighbors and loved ones. “While we thank the members of Congress who voted on this bill, we now need them to show the same courage to say no to any further funding for the Trump administration’s cruel and illegal mass deportation agenda. That means ensuring that no further funding is passed for ICE and Border Patrol until meaningful reforms are placed once and for all.”

NEW YORK — The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the National Center for Youth Law (NCYL), and the New York Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit today to demand transparency from the Trump administration regarding its treatment of pregnant unaccompanied immigrant youth in federal immigration custody. The lawsuit seeks to enforce the ACLU and NCYL’s February 2025 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records and correspondence from the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which oversees the care and custody of unaccompanied immigrant youth until they are placed with a sponsor, usually a family member, in the United States. The release of this information is important to monitor whether the Trump administration is ensuring that these marginalized young people have access to the full range of pregnancy-related care while in government custody, as is required by law. “When a pregnant young person needs abortion care, every moment counts,” said Chelsea Tejada, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. “We demand transparency from the Trump administration about these marginalized young people’s access to reproductive health care. Unaccompanied immigrant youth must have access to the full range of pregnancy care, including abortion — and if the Trump administration is making it harder for young people to get that care, please report it by calling us at 212-549-2633, and we will hold them accountable.” “Cuando una joven embarazada necesita un aborto, cada momento cuenta,” dijo Chelsea Tejada, una abogada con el Proyecto de Libertad Reproductiva de la ACLU. “Exigimos transparencia de la administración Trump sobre su tratamiento de menores embarazadas no acompañadas en albergues federales de inmigración y su acceso al aborto. Bajo la ley, estas jóvenes deben tener acceso a todos los servicios de salud reproductiva, incluyendo el aborto. Si conoce a una menor de edad embarazada que necesita ayuda en acceder a estos servicios mientras está bajo custodia federal de inmigración, llámenos al 212-549-2633.” In 2017, the first Trump administration implemented a policy — which the ACLU successfully challenged — outright denying pregnant unaccompanied youth access to abortion care. Building off the settlement in the ACLU’s case, the Biden administration instituted policies and issued regulations requiring ORR to prioritize placing pregnant youth in states without abortion bans to ensure access to miscarriage treatment and abortion care. If a minor is placed in a state with an abortion ban, and she requests an abortion, she must be transported to a state where abortion is legal. But the current Trump administration has announced that it intends to change the current ORR regulations regarding abortion access for unaccompanied immigrant youth. Immigration and reproductive rights advocates are concerned that the Trump administration will either try to impose a de facto or outright ban on abortion. “Transparency regarding the treatment of unaccompanied youth in federal immigration custody is critical to ensuring these vulnerable young people’s rights are protected,” said Mishan Wroe, Directing Attorney at the National Center for Youth Law. “All youth deserve access to comprehensive medical care, including those who are detained by our government.” “The government must provide every young person in ORR custody access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare — but right now, the Trump administration is keeping us in the dark about whether or not they’re upholding that obligation,” said Anya Weinstock, Richard Feldman Legal Fellow at the NYCLU. “As the Trump administration continues to escalate its aggressive attacks on immigrant families and youth, we need transparency to ensure every young person’s rights are protected.” Unaccompanied immigrant youth come to the United States without their parents, often fleeing violence or abuse in their home country. They usually have family in the United States who they are seeking to be reunited with. But until then, they are placed in shelters overseen by ORR. Some young people first learn that they are pregnant when they receive an initial medical exam at the shelter. Given the high rates of sexual assault on the journey to the U.S., some of these young people are pregnant as a result of violence. The FOIA seeks all records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its associated agencies, the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) and ORR, from January 2023 to the present regarding the federal government’s treatment of unaccompanied pregnant youth, including documentation of handling requests for and ensuring access to all manner of pregnancy-related care, such as abortion, pre-natal care, and childbirth. The FOIA request and complaint are just the latest in the ACLU’s long effort to ensure that unaccompanied immigrant youth have access to abortion and pregnancy care. In its 2017 class action lawsuit Garza v. Hargan, the ACLU successfully sued the first Trump administration on behalf of a then 17-year-old Central American immigrant, Jane Doe, who had been prevented from accessing abortion care. Jane bravely fought not only for her own reproductive freedom, but that of hundreds of other young people subjected to this dangerous policy. Today’s ORR regulations and policies regarding access to reproductive healthcare are built upon the ACLU’s 2020 settlement in the case. In the years since Garza was settled, the ACLU and NCYL have continued to seek transparency from federal officials, including since President Trump began his second term.