The scope of the order is unclear — it could apply to the caravan migrants or asylum seekers from Central American more broadly — but it is based on the same provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that President Donald Trump invoked to implement the travel ban in 2017.
The provision — section 212(f) of the INA — allows the president to block the admission of any “class of aliens” into the country if their entry is determined to be “detrimental to the interests of the United States.”
Authority granted to the executive under 212(f) is broad — the president can suspend admission for however long he deems necessary, or he can impose restrictions on entry that stop short of a blanket suspension.
The Trump administration has characterized the migrant caravan as an impending public safety threat, claiming that criminals and gang members were among the thousands of people marching toward the southwest border.
Trump himself courted controversy earlier this week, when he asserted without evidence that Middle Eastern people were mixed among the Central American migrants.
If the administration does issue an order blocking caravan migrants from applying for asylum, it will almost certainly face legal challenges similar to those against the 2017 travel ban.
Advertisement - story continues below
In that case, civil rights groups accused Trump of anti-Muslim animus and argued the ban violated the INA’s provisions against discrimination on the basis of religion and nationality.
But the legality of the travel ban was affirmed in Trump v. Hawaii in June, when the Supreme Court upheld the restrictions on entry by citizens of six Muslim-majority nations as consistent with the presidents’s authority under Section 212(f). In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts cited national security justifications for the travel ban and the deliberate, thorough process used to draft the final order after an initial chaotic rollout.
