Obama-Appointed Judge Blocks Trump’s Order to Bar Illegals from Seeking Asylum — Stephen Miller Slams Ruling
A federal judge appointed by former President Barack Obama has struck down a key border enforcement policy from President Donald Trump, reigniting the battle over illegal immigration and executive authority. The policy, reinstated by Trump earlier this year, would have prevented illegal aliens from applying for asylum if they failed to enter through a lawful port of entry — a critical measure aimed at restoring order to the southern border.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Daniel Moss ruled that Trump’s policy “violates federal law” and reinstated nationwide protections for illegal immigrants who cross the border outside of official checkpoints. The move marks yet another instance of activist judges using their power to override a duly elected president’s efforts to secure America’s borders and uphold immigration laws passed by Congress.
Moss’ decision effectively hands a legal victory to open-border advocates while undercutting law enforcement agencies working to stem the flow of illegal immigration. The judge claimed that federal law requires the U.S. government to consider asylum claims “regardless of how the individual entered the country,” ignoring the national security implications and border chaos this standard enables.
The Trump administration had reissued the rule as part of a broader strategy to deter illegal crossings and bring order to an asylum system overwhelmed by fraudulent and unvetted claims. Border security officials have repeatedly warned that cartels exploit loopholes in asylum policy to flood the system with migrants coached on what to say to gain entry.
Former senior Trump advisor Stephen Miller responded sharply to the ruling, blasting it as a politically motivated obstruction of national sovereignty. “An Obama judge just ruled that people who break our laws, who sneak into our country and evade detection, have a right to claim asylum. This is judicial tyranny,” Miller said in a statement.
Miller, the chief architect of President Trump’s border policies during his first term, has consistently argued that open-border policies incentivize lawbreaking and fuel human trafficking and drug smuggling. “This is the same type of ruling that has fueled the invasion of our southern border, and the American people are paying the price in crime, fentanyl, and lawlessness,” he continued.
Conservative legal experts also raised alarms about the broader implications of Judge Moss’ ruling. “This isn’t just a bad decision—it’s dangerous,” said Thomas Fitton, president of Judicial Watch. “By effectively nullifying a commonsense executive action, this judge is giving illegal immigrants more rights than American citizens.”
Justice Alito warned about this loophole that the Supreme Court left open in its ruling on nationwide injunctions. Radical left-wing judges will no doubt abuse class actions and Alito called it in his concurrence.
The ruling comes at a time when border apprehensions have again surged under the Biden administration’s policies, which have largely reversed Trump-era restrictions. The Department of Homeland Security reported over 200,000 encounters with migrants in May alone — a staggering figure that highlights the ongoing crisis.
President Trump’s directive sought to re-establish immigration control by distinguishing between legal and illegal entry — a move long supported by border sheriffs and ICE officials. Many of these officials argue that without such policies, the system is reduced to a chaotic free-for-all, driven more by political ideology than national interest.
Critics argue that rulings like this one not only usurp executive authority but also embolden left-wing groups to continue weaponizing the judiciary against border enforcement. The left has repeatedly turned to sympathetic courts, especially in liberal jurisdictions like Northern California, to block conservative policies they can’t defeat through legislation.
The consequences of these legal roadblocks are being felt in communities across the country, where overwhelmed local resources are struggling to handle waves of migrants. In some sanctuary cities, schools and hospitals are nearing a breaking point. Meanwhile, law-abiding immigrants who follow the legal process are forced to wait longer or risk being displaced by those who enter the country illegally and demand immediate benefits.
Many conservative Christians see the ruling as part of a broader spiritual and cultural erosion taking place in America. “When lawlessness is rewarded and national borders mean nothing, we are inviting chaos,” said Pastor Jeff Thomas of Dallas. “God commands justice and order — this is neither.”
Republican lawmakers are already calling for legislative remedies to override the court’s interference. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) called it “yet another example of judicial overreach undermining the will of the people.” Senator J.D. Vance (R-OH) echoed the sentiment, stating, “This isn’t justice. It’s sabotage. We need judges who respect the Constitution, not rewrite it from the bench.”
Looking ahead, Trump has vowed to reinstate his full immigration agenda if re-elected, including policies to stop asylum fraud and expedite deportations. “We will not allow radical judges to stand in the way of protecting our nation,” Trump said at a recent rally in Florida. “We will finish what we started, and we will secure the border once and for all.”
The latest ruling underscores the ongoing battle between conservative efforts to restore legal immigration standards and the left’s relentless push to erase America’s borders. With the 2026 election cycle underway, immigration remains a defining issue—and this decision may only energize those who believe it’s time to take back control.
