WASHINGTON -- The Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI) has filed a brief in the federal district court for the District of Columbia supporting President Trump’s efforts to protect the country against invasion and suspend the entry of illegal aliens across the southern border.
On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued Proclamation 10888, Guaranteeing the States Protection Against Invasion, in which he declared an invasion at the southern border and invoked his constitutional executive powers in addition to his statutory authority to “suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens” or impose “any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”
As part of his Proclamation, President Trump restricted any alien who crossed the border after that date from pursuing asylum in the United States. Plaintiffs claim that the President does not have the authority to restrict access to asylum.
In its brief, IRLI shows that the plaintiffs have no chance of success in their argument, because the question of whether an invasion is occurring and any response to such an invasion is a non-justiciable political question. In addition, in recognizing the President’s authority to suspend the entry of aliens, Congress has not established any judicially enforceable limit to the President’s exercise of discretion in suspending the entry of aliens. This means, IRLI shows, that Courts cannot review any claims against exercises of such executive powers, including claims under the Administrative Procedure Act.
“The power to exclude aliens is inherently an executive power under the Constitution,” said Dale L. Wilcox, executive director and general counsel of IRLI. “And under the Constitution, the federal government is charged with the duty to protect the States from invasion, which President Trump is finally accomplishing through this Proclamation. As for the plaintiffs’ claims here, they must fail, because Congress didn’t want courts and litigants interfering with executive determinations in this area. We hope the court recognizes its lack of jurisdiction over this matter and grants the government’s motion for summary judgment.”
The case is Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. Noem, 1:25-cv-00306, (D.D.C.).
