Asylum Seekers

A lawsuit accuses the U.S. of sharing confidential information on Iranian asylum seekers with Iran, which the Homeland Security Department denies, stating it would violate national immigration regulations.

A lawsuit alleges that President Donald Trump's administration illegally shared confidential information about Iranian asylum seekers with Iran's government. The Trump administration denied the allegations, and the lawsuit is being represented by the Public Citizen Litigation Group on behalf of the Iranian American Legal Defense Fund.

A lawsuit alleges that the Trump administration provided Iran with information about asylum seekers. The article also references a billboard displaying Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran.

An Iranian American advocacy group sued the Trump administration, alleging it endangered Iranian asylum seekers by sharing confidential information with the Iranian regime, including details about their asylum applications and participation in pro-democracy protests. The lawsuit challenges the policy as a violation of confidentiality rights under the UN Convention Against Torture, with the Department of Homeland Security denying the claims and asserting compliance with consular protocols.

A lawsuit alleges the Trump administration's immigration agencies shared confidential information about Iranian asylum seekers with the Iranian government, violating regulations and endangering individuals. The complaint claims U.S. officials arranged meetings with Iranian representatives to coordinate deportations, including details of asylum applications involving persecution for religious conversion, sexuality, or anti-government protests.

Egypt is arresting and deporting refugees and asylum seekers. Human Rights Watch (HRW) urges the government to amend its new asylum law to align with international standards.

Residents of a village claim asylum seekers have caused significant disruption, leading to claims of being outnumbered and living in hardship. The government is reportedly planning to relocate more asylum seekers to the area.

Labour reversed its stance on 'Migrant St' after the Mail reported that asylum seekers were prioritized over veterans for £250,000 newbuild homes. The policy shift highlights a dispute over housing allocation priorities.

Libyan authorities have used incendiary rhetoric and implemented mass detention and expulsions of migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees, leading to anti-migrant protests, according to Human Rights Watch.

Asylum seekers will be required to pay £10,000 towards their accommodation costs. The article mentions Shabana Mahmood and includes a photo credit to Reuters.

Asylum seekers in the UK may be required to repay up to £10,000 in accommodation costs once they begin earning income. The policy raises doubts about its enforceability, as it is unclear whether individuals will actually pay back the amount.

Asylum seekers in the UK will be required to pay £10,000 to cover state-funded living costs under a new law included in the immigration and asylum bill. Charities have criticized the means-tested scheme, comparing it to a tax on refugees fleeing war, torture, and famine.

Anti-immigrant protests in South Africa are intensifying as a clause in the NHI Act could deny HIV treatment to refugees, asylum seekers, and undocumented migrants. Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi claims this would aid the fight against HIV, but the court's potential approval of the Act raises questions about possible changes.

Shabana Mahmood has unveiled a new plan to bring thousands of asylum seekers to Britain under a community sponsorship scheme. The plan is implemented through a community sponsorship scheme.

A 6-3 Supreme Court majority removed protections for immigrants and asylum seekers during the Trump administration’s crackdown, as reported by Ann E. Marimow.

The Supreme Court justices displayed public tension as Justice Sonia Sotomayor read a dissent criticizing a majority opinion on asylum policies, referencing the Holocaust and the Statue of Liberty. Conservative Justice Samuel Alito expressed surprise at her dissent, and major rulings on Trump's policies are pending.

The US Supreme Court has supported Trump's immigration policies by ending humanitarian protections for people from Haiti and Syria, blocking asylum seekers at the US-Mexico border, and granting border officials discretion to deport lawful permanent residents. The rulings align with Trump's campaign against immigrants fleeing violence and disaster.

The US Supreme Court supported Trump's policy of turning away asylum seekers at the border. The decision was announced in Washington, DC.

The US Supreme Court has allowed the Trump administration to block asylum seekers at the US-Mexico border, enabling the revival of a policy that prevents migrants from entering US soil to claim asylum. The ruling reshapes the US asylum system by permitting federal agents to stop migrants at the border.

The Supreme Court ruled that asylum seekers who claim to be fleeing persecution may be turned away at the southern border. The decision sharply limits the right to asylum for such migrants.

The Supreme Court ruled to sharply limit the right to asylum for migrants who say they are fleeing persecution. Asylum seekers may now be turned away at the southern border.

The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to uphold the federal government’s authority to turn away asylum seekers at the US-Mexico border when officials determine crossings are overburdened. The decision overturned a lower court’s finding that the policy violated federal law, with Justice Samuel Alito arguing that asylum seekers stopped in Mexico have not yet 'arrived in the United States.' The ruling allows the 'metering' policy to potentially resume, separate from another ongoing legal challenge to a different border entry policy.

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the U.S. government can legally prevent asylum seekers from entering the country, thereby blocking their ability to apply for asylum. The decision interprets federal law as allowing authorities to stop asylum seekers from physically setting foot in the United States.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that asylum-seekers must fully cross into the United States to apply for asylum, siding with the Trump administration's policy. The decision, written by Justice Samuel Alito, states that standing on Mexico’s side of the border does not constitute 'arriving in the United States' under the Immigration Nationality Act. Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, arguing the ruling allows the executive branch to block asylum seekers fleeing persecution.

The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to potentially revive an immigration policy used to turn back migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Supreme Court cleared the way for the Trump administration to potentially revive an immigration policy once used to turn back migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to potentially revive an immigration policy that previously turned back asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to potentially reinstate an immigration policy previously used to deny asylum seekers entry at the U.S.-Mexico border. The policy aimed to turn back migrants seeking asylum at the border.

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, allowed the Trump administration to revive an immigration policy that limits daily asylum applications at the U.S.-Mexico border. The policy, previously used under Obama and expanded by Trump, was rescinded in 2021 but is now potentially reinstatable. The ruling permits authorities to meter asylum seekers, arguing it addresses border surges, while advocates highlight humanitarian concerns.

The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to revive a policy limiting daily asylum applications at the U.S.-Mexico border, overturning a lower court's block. The 6-3 decision upheld the practice, with the majority arguing migrants knocking on the border door are not yet 'arrived,' while dissenters highlighted humanitarian concerns. The policy, previously used under Obama and expanded under Trump, was rescinded in 2021 but remains a contentious issue.

The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to block asylum seekers from entering the US at the US-Mexico border, enabling the resumption of a practice that denies migrants the right to claim asylum. The decision reshapes the US asylum system and concludes a multi-administration legal battle.

The Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to potentially revive a policy that limits daily asylum applications at the U.S.-Mexico border, previously used under Obama and Trump. The policy, which created long waiting times and humanitarian concerns, was rescinded in 2021 but remains a point of legal contention. The court overturned a lower court's block, with the Justice Department arguing asylum seekers stopped at the border haven't 'arrived' and thus aren't entitled to screening.

The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, allowed the Trump administration to revive a policy that limited daily asylum applications at the U.S.-Mexico border, previously used under Obama and expanded under Trump. The policy, which created long wait times and humanitarian concerns, was rescinded in 2021 by President Biden but is now potentially available again for future use.

An Afghan Taliban delegation met EU officials in Brussels for the first time to discuss migrant issues. Rights groups criticized the meeting as legitimizing the Taliban, while the EU defended it as a step toward easier repatriation of failed asylum seekers.

Ottawa cut therapy sessions for refugees to a 10-hour annual cap, implemented by the federal government in spring. Mental health practitioners have been lobbying for the policy's reversal, but with limited success.

The UK government plans to use facial age estimation (FAE) technology to determine the age of asylum seekers at borders, despite internal reports showing the system frequently misclassifies children as adults and exhibits bias. Asylum seekers without age-proving documents risk losing legal protections if incorrectly labeled as adults, with high-stakes implications for migrants in 2025.

Asylum seekers deported by the U.S. to Sierra Leone face potential return to their home countries where they fear persecution, despite legal protections from U.S. courts. The U.S. is deporting individuals to Sierra Leone, which may not ensure their safety.

Migrants deported by the U.S. to Sierra Leone risk being sent back to their home countries where they face persecution, despite prior U.S. court orders blocking such deportations. The U.S. has third-country deportation agreements with Sierra Leone and other African nations, allowing the Trump administration to bypass asylum protections by indirectly forcing migrants to return to their countries of origin.

Up to 90% of Ireland’s asylum seekers may have entered via the Northern Ireland land border, with data indicating the common travel area is being exploited in both UK-to-Ireland and Ireland-to-UK directions, though more prominently for asylum in Ireland.

All asylum seekers have been relocated from Epping's Bell Hotel, which was central to anti-migrant protests following a sexual assault by an Ethiopian resident on a 14-year-old girl.