Tensions are evident in a rare display among the Supreme Court justices at the end of the term. On Thursday, conservative Justice Samuel Alito read a majority ruling limiting asylum claims at the southern border. Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor then read her dissent, highlighting the struggles of asylum seekers and referencing a historical tragedy involving Jewish refugees in 1939. A surprised Alito defended the majority's decision, emphasizing policy continuity across administrations. A court spokesperson later the exchange stemmed from a misunderstanding on Alito's part. It comes as the court prepares to release more significant opinions next week. Signs of tensions have emerged at other points this term.

The Supreme Court has cleared the way for the Trump administration to potentially revive an immigration policy once used to turn back migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border. The justices overturned a lower court order on Thursday blocking the practice used by presidents of both parties. It limited the number of people who could apply for asylum each day during President Donald Trump's first term. Advocates said the tactic created a humanitarian crisis as thousands of people settled in unsafe makeshift shelters to await their turn. The Trump administration said it was necessary to deal with an increase of asylum seekers at the border.

A U.S. appeals court has blocked President Donald Trump's executive order suspending asylum access at the southern border. The court ruled Friday that immigration laws allow people to apply for asylum at the border, and the president cannot bypass this. The decision stems from Trump's action on Inauguration Day 2025, declaring the border situation an invasion and suspending asylum. The court found that the Immigration and Nationality Act doesn't give the president authority to override asylum procedures. The White House says the asylum ban was within Trump's powers, but the Department of Justice plans to seek further review.

A federal judge has ruled that an executive order by President Donald Trump suspending asylum access at the southern border is unlawful. Wednesday's decision could throw into doubt one of the key pillars of the president's plans to crack down on immigration at the southern border. But the judge gave the Trump administration two weeks to appeal. In an executive order Jan. 20, Trump declared that the situation at the southern border was an invasion, and he was "suspending the physical entry" of migrants and their ability to seek asylum until he decides it is over.

Asylum-seekers from around the world face new challenges at the U.S. border. President Donald Trump suspended the asylum system just after his inauguration as part of his wide-ranging crackdown on illegal immigration. Lawyers, activists and immigrants say the process is now unclear, with many people deported after fleeting conversations with immigration officials while others languish in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody. Attorneys who work frequently with asylum-seekers at the border say their phones have gone quiet since Trump took office. Legal battles are ongoing, with rights groups challenging the restrictions.

President Joe Biden says he's restricting asylum to help "gain control" of the U.S.-Mexico border. The American Civil Liberties Union says it'll sue over Biden's plan to enact immediate significant restrictions on migrants seeking asylum at the border. Biden signed the proclamation Tuesday as the White House tries to neutralize immigration as a political liability before November's elections. Biden's order would bar migrants from being granted asylum when U.S. officials deem the southern border to be overwhelmed. The Democratic president has contemplated unilateral action for months, especially after Republican lawmakers rejected a bipartisan security deal at the behest of presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump. Trump says Biden has surrendered the southern border.