Passim

Issues › Border

Proclamation 10888: asylum shutdown and summary removals at the southern border

Partly blocked

Asylum bar in effect; summary removals blocked

Supreme Court considers the government's petition at its Nov. 6 conference

The district court held the proclamation and guidance unlawful and certified a class of people subject to them, and the D.C. Circuit affirmed. Under the D.C. Circuit's August 1, 2025 partial stay, still in place because that court stayed its mandate pending certiorari, the government may still refuse asylum applications. It may not remove class members through the extra-statutory summary procedures or without the withholding and CAT procedures the law requires. The Supreme Court will consider the petition at its November 6, 2026 conference.

Status as of
October 31, 2026
Dockets checked
November 3, 2026

The policy

Proclamation 10888 (January 20, 2025) declared an invasion at the southern border and suspended entry for people who cross between ports of entry or without required documents. DHS guidance implementing it barred those people from applying for asylum and subjected them to new summary removal procedures outside the INA, without the withholding-of-removal and Convention Against Torture procedures the statute and regulations require. Three legal-services organizations (RAICES, Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and the Florence Project) and 13 individuals brought a class action in the District of Columbia. The government's petition, Mullin v. RAICES, No. 26-239, is pending in the Supreme Court.

Court rulings

Rulings on the policy by court. Stay and procedural rulings say what the court did and aren't counted in the circuit row.

  1. 1No ruling
  2. 2No ruling
  3. 3No ruling
  4. 4No ruling
  5. 5No ruling
  6. 6No ruling
  7. 7No ruling
  8. 8No ruling
  9. 9No ruling
  10. 10No ruling
  11. 11No ruling
  12. DCAgainst
  • Ruled against the policy
  • Upheld the policy
  • Mixed or split
  • No merits ruling tracked
CourtRulingCaseNote
D.D.C. Ruled against the policy Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. NoemNo. 25-5243 · Jul 2, 2025 Summary judgment for plaintiffs: guidance vacated in part, classwide injunction and declaration. The asylum parts were stayed on appeal.
D.C. Cir. Ruled against the policy Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. NoemNo. 25-5243 · Apr 24, 2026 Affirmed; Judge Walker dissented in part on standing, asylum and 8 U.S.C. 1252(f)(1). Rehearing en banc denied July 23, 2026. Cert petition No. 26-239.

Who's covered

  • Certified class · Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem

    On July 2, 2025 the district court certified a Rule 23(b)(2) class of everyone who is or will be subject to the proclamation and present in the United States. The D.C. Circuit's August 1, 2025 stay order clarified that the class currently covers only the people in the quoted definition, and the merits panel affirmed certification as clarified. Class members are protected by the unstayed parts of the injunction: no removal through the extra-statutory procedures and no removal without the withholding-of-removal and CAT procedures the statute and regulations require.

    all individuals who (1) are present in the United States while Proclamation 10888 and/or its implementation is in effect, (2) are not statutorily ineligible for all forms of relief from removal listed in point (3), and (3) absent the Proclamation and/or its implementing guidance, would seek asylum, 8 U.S.C. § 1158, withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b), or withholding under the Convention Against Torture, see Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277, § 2242, 112 Stat. 2681-822 (1998) (codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1231 note).

    Operative class definition (appellate order)

  • Everywhere the policy applies

    The district court also vacated the implementing guidance under 5 U.S.C. 706 to the extent it replaces statutory removal with extra-statutory summary expulsion procedures. The D.C. Circuit's stay order stayed only the vacatur of the guidance on asylum applications, so the rest of the vacatur is in effect.

    Source

For practitioners

  • The D.C. Circuit's August 1, 2025 order stayed the district court's rulings on asylum applications: the vacatur of the guidance on asylum, the injunction against removing class members without complying with the asylum statute, and the declaration about asylum. It denied a stay in all other respects. Both sides' Supreme Court briefs say the D.C. Circuit later stayed its mandate pending certiorari, so that partial stay continues. [1][2][3]
  • The D.C. Circuit held that 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a)(1) don't authorize removals outside the INA's procedures, that the proclamation can't suspend the statutory right to apply for asylum or deny access to withholding of removal, and that it can't curtail the mandatory CAT procedures. It held that 8 U.S.C. 1252(f)(1) doesn't apply to vacatur and doesn't bar the classwide injunction here. [1]
  • The government's petition presents three questions: whether the proclamation and guidance are lawful, whether 8 U.S.C. 1252(f)(1) bars the classwide relief, and whether the class definition satisfies Article III and Rule 23. The respondents opposed on September 23, 2026, and the government replied on October 6. [1][2]
  • The district court deferred deciding whether it can and should grant relief to plaintiffs and putative class members who are no longer in the United States, and directed the parties to propose a briefing schedule on that question. [1]
  • A separate USCIS interim final rule, Affirmative Asylum Referrals Without Interview (91 Fed. Reg. 47101, July 28, 2026), concerns affirmative asylum applicants inside the country, not the border proclamation. It's challenged in Immigration Equality v. Mullin, D.D.C. No. 1:26-cv-02921, where the plaintiffs' motion for a stay under 5 U.S.C. 705 hadn't been decided as of October 29, 2026. [1][2]

In plain language

In January 2025 the President issued an order closing the southern border to people who cross between official entry points or without papers. Under the government's rules, those people can't apply for asylum and can be sent back quickly, without the usual immigration court process. Federal courts in Washington, D.C., ruled that this is illegal and protected a large group of affected people in a class action. For now, part of that ruling is on hold, so the government can still refuse asylum applications. But it can't use its fast-track removal process, and it can't skip the steps that protect people from being sent to a country where they would be persecuted or tortured. The Supreme Court is set to consider whether to take the case on November 6, 2026. An immigration lawyer can tell you what applies to you.

Find free or low-cost legal help

New on the dockets, not yet reviewed

Court actions picked up from the dockets after the last review. They're quoted as filed and don't change the status until they're checked against the order.

Nothing new since the last review.

How we got here

  1. Petition distributed for November 6 conference

    Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem · D.C. Cir. · Source

  2. Government filed certiorari reply and suggested alternative D.V.D. hold

    Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem · D.C. Cir. · Source

  3. Respondents opposed Supreme Court review of asylum-shutdown ruling

    Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem · D.C. Cir. · Source

  4. Government sought Supreme Court review of asylum-shutdown ruling

    Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem · D.C. Cir. · Source

  5. D.C. Circuit affirmed asylum-shutdown ruling

    Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem · D.C. Cir. · Source

  6. District court blocked southern-border asylum shutdown policy

    Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem · D.C. Cir. · Source

Status changes

Selected changes since August 1, 2025, each with the order behind it.

  • Asylum bar in effect; summary removals blocked. D.C. Circuit stayed the asylum parts of the district court's order pending appeal and denied a stay of the rest Source

Cases (1)

CaseCourtLatestAs of
Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. NoemNo. 25-5243 · Lead case · Class actionD.C. Cir.Asylum-access petition distributed for November 6 Supreme Court conferenceOct 7, 2026

In the news

Every status statement on this page links to the order it rests on. Docket entries marked "not yet reviewed" are quoted as filed. How we track litigation