U.S. Court Upholds the Rule of Law, Strikes Down Trump’s Asylum Ban
- Jasmine Ruffilli
- Jul 17
- 2 min read
A recent decision from the United States has reaffirmed important legal principles regarding Asylum and the separation of powers, between the Government Executive power, principles that resonate globally, and here in Australia.
The Trump directive effectively suspended access to asylum on 20 January 2025 for those crossing from Mexico, prompting immediate legal challenges from civil rights groups.
District Judge Randolph D. Moss in Washington, D.C. ruled on 02 July 2025 that the Trump administration does not have the authority to block individuals crossing the southern border from seeking asylum.

In a detailed 128-page judgment, Judge Moss found that the policy violated U.S. immigration law, stating clearly that the president “cannot adopt an alternative immigration system” outside of what Congress has legislated. The court reaffirmed that asylum seekers have long been entitled under U.S. law to apply for protection if they fear persecution in their home countries.
The ruling is set to take effect on 16 July 2025, although an appeal is expected.
One would hope that the Trump Government does not attempt to change Immigration law principles to disadvantage the visa applicants during the appeal process. This occurred in Australia during a High Court appeal case conducted by our Firm, which resulted in the proposal to Parliament and enactment of s 501 Character Grounds into the Migration Act. This resulted in a broad interpretation and arguably discriminatory definition of “character” justifying the refusal or cancellation which also loosely extended to the "character test" applied to the applicant having had "association" with a group, organisation or person.
Could the Trump Government also try to introduce changes to the USA Immigration law to circumvent domestic International Law, the Hague Convention, to which the USA is a signatory and they have the international obligation to accept refugees under.
While this case plays out in the U.S., it reflects broader legal principles that matter globally and in Australia. It highlights the importance of Judicial Oversight, the rights of vulnerable individuals seeking protection, and the limits of executive power in a democracy.
Having been committed to Immigration law and Human Rights over many years, we recognise the critical importance of fair asylum processes and legal protections for those fleeing persecution. We remain committed to upholding these principles and the Rule of Law.
If you have any questions or need assistance, please feel free to contact us on +61 3 94163463 or email: email@osullivanandruffilli.com.au
Comments