• The US appeals court blocks Trump's executive order suspending asylum access.
• Judges affirm the Immigration and Nationality Act guarantees the right to seek asylum.
• The ruling dismisses the president's authority to unilaterally alter immigration procedures.
• Advocates celebrate the ruling as a victory for asylum seekers' rights.
• The White House plans to appeal the ruling, labeling it politically motivated.

A US federal appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump cannot prevent migrants from seeking asylum at the US-Mexico border, effectively blocking his executive order that suspended asylum access. The three-judge panel from the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit cited the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which allows individuals to apply for asylum at the border, reinforcing that the president cannot circumvent established legal processes for immigration, according to Indiatimes and LA Times.

The court's opinion concluded that Trump's actions to suspend the admission of migrants constituted an overreach of presidential authority, with Judge J. Michelle Childs writing, "Congress did not intend to grant the Executive the expansive removal authority it asserts." This judgment not only upholds the legislative framework established by Congress but also emphasizes that any modifications to the asylum process must be pursued through appropriate legislative channels, as stated by CBS News and Al Jazeera.

In the wake of the ruling, advocacy groups such as the ACLU expressed that the decision is essential for migrants fleeing violence and persecution, affirming their right to a fair hearing. "This ruling potentially saves the lives of thousands of people fleeing grave danger," stated ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, reflecting the sentiments of many immigrant rights activists who view the order as a vital step in protecting human rights, according to Le Monde and NPR.

Despite this significant ruling, the White House has indicated plans to appeal, asserting that the president's asylum ban falls within his constitutional powers as commander in chief. White House officials have characterized the judicial decisions against the ban as politically motivated, suggesting a broader agenda at play against Trump's immigration policies, as reported by LA Times and CBS News.