Kevin Daley, DCNF

A coalition of former Republican politicians and executive branch officials filed an amicus — or a “friend-of-the-court” — brief at the Supreme Court, arguing that President Donald Trump’s asylum rules are unlawful.

“The Attorney General’s regulation is inconsistent with the plain text and meaning of [federal law],” the brief reads. “That should be the end of the matter.”

The Trump administration issued new rules governing asylum claims in November as a migrant caravan coalesced in Tijuana, Mexico, near the border with the United States.

The rules operate in two parts: the departments of Justice and Homeland Security issued a regulation on Nov. 9 denying asylum eligibility to any alien subject to a presidential proclamation regulating immigration at the southern border. That same day, Trump issued an order suspending the entry of all aliens along the Mexican border, except those who arrive through designated points of entry.

Taken together, the president’s revisions disqualify illegal aliens from receiving asylum. Critics say the move clearly contradicts federal law and U.S. treaty obligations.

HERE’S WHAT YOU’RE MISSING …

For its part, the administration says the reforms are necessary to address an unprecedented security situation while it seeks a resolution with the Mexican government.

In reply, the former GOP officials’ brief says the government is essentially arguing that the attorney general has a “a free hand to suspend asylum categorically for any reason for any duration.”