The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled on Thursday that former President Donald Trump acted within his authority when he indefinitely suspended the country's refugee admissions program last year. The decision is a major victory for the Trump administration and a blow to the thousands of people awaiting resettlement.
A three-judge panel largely overturned a series of preliminary injunctions issued by a federal judge in Seattle (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington). That court is historically known for precedent-setting immigration rulings that often block federal policy, a pattern tied to its liberal judicial record and geographic location. The earlier injunctions had blocked Trump’s executive order suspending admissions and required the federal government to resume funding for resettlement agencies. However, the court left in place a ban on freezing funds for services to refugees already in the United States.
In his opinion, Judge Jay Bybee acknowledged the “huge practical consequences of this ruling,” noting that more than 128,000 vetted and conditionally approved refugees were left in limbo. Nevertheless, he said Congress had given the president the authority to “suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens” under the Immigration and Nationality Act, and that the wisdom of such a policy is not for the courts to decide.
Representatives of immigrant organizations and resettlement agencies expressed deep disappointment. David Duea, head of Lutheran Community Services Northwest, called the decision a blow to families who “did everything right, checked all the boxes, and waited years for an invitation to the United States.” His organization, founded in the 1920s, like other similar agencies in Seattle and Washington state, has historically resettled refugees since the 1970s, providing housing, training, and social support. The ruling leaves thousands in a difficult position, including some who already held airline tickets.
Trump’s executive order, signed in January 2025 in the opening hours of his second term, not only suspended new refugee admissions but also froze processing of applications. Shortly thereafter, the U.S. Department of State froze federal funding for resettlement agencies, threatening basic assistance to refugees in the U.S. and the payment of staff salaries.
In response, Lutheran Community Services Northwest, along with other organizations such as Jewish Family Service and World Relief, and private individuals sued the Trump administration. Earlier, U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead ordered the government to allow at least 160 refugees who already had travel plans to enter. But after a government appeal, the higher court stayed those orders, and only 77 people were admitted to the country under a special exception.
The decision comes amid sharp cuts to refugee caps. While the Biden administration had planned to admit up to 125,000 people for fiscal year 2025, the Trump administration set the ceiling at 7,500 — the lowest level since the program was created in 1980. Those slots will largely be allocated to Afrikaners from South Africa. Refugees, unlike asylum-seekers at the border, undergo years of vetting overseas and are typically resettled in the U.S. through the United Nations.
This is not the first time Trump has suspended the program: similar measures were taken in 2017. Resettlement agencies note that it took years afterward to rebuild the infrastructure for processing overseas applications and to scale up services domestically, and the current decision could have long-term negative consequences for the entire system. In Seattle, the resettlement program has historically contributed to demographic diversity, attracting people from Somalia, Ukraine, Syria, and other regions who filled jobs in logistics, healthcare, and the service sector. But reduced funding now threatens cutbacks in services for refugees, increasing pressure on local charities, the housing market, and social services on which whole communities depend.
Based on: Trump’s halt of U.S. refugee program was lawful, appeals court rules