A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Washington, D.C. Circuit on Friday reaffirmed the ruling limiting President Donald Trump's asylum ban at the U.S.-Mexico border, thus blocking the order issued on day one.

Upon taking office, Trump issued a proclamation seeking to eliminate asylum for all immigrants except those who entered the United States through ports of entry, arguing that the change was necessary to address the "invasion" at the Mexican border.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued the government on behalf of nonprofit organizations in early February.

In early July, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss, an appointee of former President Obama, blocked Trump's ban, alleging that the government violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

The panel of judges on the Court of Appeals, composed of Patricia Millett, Cornelia Pillard, and Gregory G. Katsas, issued an administrative stay of Moss's ruling. Moss argued that the president overstepped his authority by severely limiting asylum for migrants fleeing danger and persecution. The Washington, D.C., circuit panel lifted the stay of Moss's decision. The panel of judges narrowed the scope of the district judge's decision, allowing the U.S. government to continue using Trump's order to bar migrants from participating in the asylum system.

While lifting the stay on Moss's ruling, the D.C. Circuit panel also narrowed his order, limiting the class members eligible for asylum to only asylum seekers already in the U.S. while Trump's executive order is in effect.

The appeals court also narrowed the scope of Moss's ruling, partially granting a request from the Trump administration.

The panel allowed the Trump administration to continue using the president's proclamation to deny migrants access to the U.S. asylum system, noting that U.S. law allows, but does not require, the government to grant asylum to those who demonstrate they could be persecuted based on their race, religion, politics, or other factors.

However, the panel also said that Trump's proclamation could not be used to prevent migrants from seeking other forms of humanitarian protection that the United States is legally obligated to grant to certain migrants fleeing persecution and torture.

These are known as "withholding of removal" and are covered by the United Nations Convention Against Torture. These protections have a higher legal threshold than asylum, but unlike asylum, they are mandatory, not discretionary, and must be granted to those who qualify.

The justices scheduled expedited proceedings to decide the merits of the case, asking both the government and advocates challenging Trump's proclamation to file arguments by September 26.

Trump administration officials have credited the president's proclamation and other measures, including the deployment of thousands of additional troops to the southern border, with a historic decline in illegal crossings there.

The president secured the border in record time at an unprecedented level using every available legal tool provided by Congress. A corrupt district judge took away those tools, threatening the safety of Americans and ignoring a Supreme Court decision issued just days earlier admonishing district courts for granting nationwide warrants, Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin told CBS News. The Trump Administration is committed to restoring the integrity of our immigration system and our justice system, McLaughlin added. In July, just 4,600 migrants were apprehended crossing the southern border illegally, the lowest monthly number recorded by Border Patrol and a number the Biden administration reported daily for many months. While public monthly reporting began in fiscal year 2000, annual data suggests that the last time Border Patrol had this level of apprehensions was in the 1960s.