A federal judge in Boston has ordered the Trump administration to restore the legal status of migrants who entered the United States under a Biden-era immigration program that used a phone app to manage asylum seekers at the southern border.
U.S. District Court Judge Allison Burroughs ruled on Tuesday that the Trump administration’s decision to terminate the immigration parole status of these migrants violated procedural requirements under U.S. law. The migrants were originally admitted through the CBP One program, initiated during the Biden administration, which allowed people seeking asylum to request entry via a designated mobile application.
Details of the CBP One program and subsequent changes
The CBP One system facilitated the lawful entry of more than 900,000 migrants at official ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border. The Biden administration promoted the program as a tool to reduce illegal crossings by providing a legal pathway for asylum seekers to present themselves at the border.
After taking office, the Trump administration repurposed and renamed this app to serve different immigration enforcement functions, including encouraging self-deportations. In April 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced it was ending the parole status granted under CBP One and called on affected migrants to leave the country voluntarily or face removal.
Legal and governmental responses
Judge Burroughs found that the termination of parole status ignored required legal procedures, thereby invalidating the Trump administration’s action. The ruling means the migrants admitted under CBP One should have their lawful parole status reinstated.
The Justice Department indicated it is likely to appeal the decision. Meanwhile, DHS defended its authority to revoke parole, accusing the Biden administration of abusing parole authority with the CBP One program and worsening border security challenges.
Advocacy groups welcomed the ruling. Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, which challenged the parole terminations in court, called the decision a rejection of a “harmful and destabilizing” policy. She emphasized that the migrants had followed legal processes by registering, being inspected, and receiving parole correctly.
Why it matters
This ruling highlights ongoing legal and political disputes over immigration enforcement policies, particularly mechanisms used to manage asylum seekers at the border. It also raises questions about the executive branch’s authority to change or revoke immigration statuses granted under previous administrations.
The decision may impact hundreds of thousands of migrants currently without legal status after the parole termination and influence how future immigration programs utilizing technology might be implemented or challenged in court.
Read more Politics stories on Goka World News.