The Trump administration’s onslaught on asylum has led to dozens of legal challenges—and the legal tactics used to defend the policies are raising concerns from some conservatives on the federal bench.

While conservative members of the bench tend to grant more deference to the administration when it comes to immigration policy, some GOP-appointed judges have taken issue with the reasons presented in court to justify the changes. Those closely watching immigration cases say that as asylum restrictions reach unprecedented levels, judges are more skeptical of the claims presented in court and are unwilling to let major changes go unchecked.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]