2026年11月13日 美国东部时间下午2:15 / CBS新闻
华盛顿讯——最高法院于周五宣布，将受理针对特朗普总统一项指令的法律纠纷，该指令旨在暂停非法穿越美国南部边境的移民获得庇护制度及其他法律保护的权限。
这起案件是特朗普第二任期移民议程相关的最新案件，最高法院将在未来数月内作出裁决。大法官们还在审议将移民遣送至第三国，以及无限期拘留在美国境内的非法移民、且不给予保释听证会的合法性。
预计这些案件将在6月底或7月初作出裁决。
特朗普已将打击非法移民作为其第二任期的核心工作，期间美国主要城市加强了执法行动，并对在美国境内的非法移民实施大规模遣返。在总统第二届任期内，美墨边境的非法入境人数降至历史最低水平，而移民拘留人数则创下新高。
为遏制入境美国的非法移民，特朗普在重返白宫的首日便发布公告，称南部边境正面临“入侵”。总统暂停了移民在边境口岸之间穿越南部边境的入境权限，并禁止他们申请庇护及其他允许留在美国的法律保护措施。
随后，国土安全部发布了落实总统指令的指南。移民当局此后一直依据该政策，对非法入境的移民实施即决遣返，不允许他们申请庇护。
2025年2月，三家非营利组织及13人提起集体诉讼，质疑特朗普总统的公告及政府的指南。数月后，华盛顿的一名联邦法官撤销了特朗普政府的庇护限制措施，并裁定其为非法。
法官伦道夫·莫斯认定，无论是宪法还是联邦移民法，都未赋予特朗普政府取代国会制定的规则与程序的权力。法官还指出，移民法并未赋予总统单方面限制在美国境内的非公民申请庇护或其他保护措施的权力。
作为裁决的一部分，莫斯将总统公告所覆盖的所有人员认定为集体诉讼集团，并禁止特朗普政府对其执行该项指令。
特朗普政府提出上诉，同年4月，一个由三名法官组成的合议庭以票分的结果维持了地区法院的裁决，裁定该公告和指南超出了总统的权限。占据多数的两名法官还认定，总统无权暂停移民申请庇护的权利，也无权依据政府新的即决遣返程序将移民遣返。
在法律程序持续进行期间，特朗普政府仍在执行其暂停庇护申请的政策，哥伦比亚特区联邦巡回上诉法院已暂停了针对国土安全部的裁决，等待最高法院的复审。
Supreme Court takes up case over Trump effort to suspend asylum access at southern border
November 13, 2026 2:15 PM EST / CBS News
Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday said it will take up a legal fight over President Trump’s directive suspending access to the asylum system and other legal protections for migrants illegally crossing the southern border.
The case is the latest involving Mr. Trump’s second-term immigration agenda that the Supreme Court will decide in the coming months. The justices are also considering the legality of removing migrants to third countries and indefinitely detaining immigrants in the U.S. illegally without access to a bond hearing.
A decision in the cases is expected by the end of June or early July.
Mr. Trump has made cracking down on immigration a cornerstone of his second term, which has seen enhanced enforcement operations in major U.S. cities and mass deportations of people in the U.S. illegally. Unlawful crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border have reached historic lows and immigration detentions have set new highs under the president’s second administration.
As part of his efforts to curb illegal immigration into the U.S., Mr. Trump issued a proclamation on his first day back in the White House claiming that there is an “invasion” at the southern border. The president suspended the entry of migrants crossing the southern border between ports of entry and barred them from seeking asylum and other legal protections that would allow them to remain in the U.S.
The Department of Homeland Security then issued guidance implementing the president’s directive. Immigration authorities have since relied on the policy to summarily remove migrants entering the country illegally without allowing them to apply for asylum.
In February 2025, three nonprofit groups and 13 people filed a class-action lawsuit challenging Mr. Trump’s proclamation and the administration’s guidance. Several months later, a federal judge in Washington set aside the Trump administration’s asylum restrictions and found them unlawful.
The judge, Randolph Moss, found that neither the Constitution nor federal immigration law gave the Trump administration the authority to replace the rules and procedures enacted by Congress. The judge also said that immigration law does not give the president the unilateral authority to limit the rights of noncitizens in the U.S. to apply for asylum or other protections.
As part of his decision, Moss certified a class of all people covered by the president’s proclamation and blocked the Trump administration from enforcing the directive against them.
The Trump administration appealed, and in April, a divided three-judge panel upheld the district court’s decision and ruled that the proclamation and guidance exceeded the president’s authority. The two judges in the majority also found that the president does not have the power to suspend migrants’ right to apply for asylum or deport migrants under his administration’s new summary removal proceedings.
The Trump administration has continued to enforce its policy suspending access to asylum while legal proceedings have continued, and the D.C. Circuit halted its ruling against DHS pending Supreme Court review.
发表回复