Officials from the Trump administration are vigorously defending the president’s decision to halt asylum claims at the southern border via an executive order.

During a session on Tuesday, representatives from the administration presented their argument to a panel of judges from the D.C. Court of Appeals. This session follows a legal challenge initiated by groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union, National Immigrant Justice Center, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, Texas Civil Rights Project, ACLU of the District of Columbia, and ACLU of Texas, who are seeking a permanent injunction to prevent the administration from denying asylum claims.

In a related development, a different appeals panel had previously lifted a lower court’s order, thereby permitting the administration to restrict asylum seekers while the case’s core issues are being examined.

During the proceedings, administration officials cited the authority granted by the 212(f) proclamation, which empowers the president to suspend the entry of migrants under specific conditions. They justified their actions by claiming an “invasion” at the southern border, which, they argued, justifies the denial of asylum protections.

Department of Justice attorneys on behalf of the Trump administration contended Trump has the power in deciding who is admissible into the country, regardless of whether it’s an asylum claim.

The president can “take the steps necessary to make an entry bar effective, including defining consequences for violating it,” said DOJ attorney Drew Ensign.

Encounters with migrants at the southern border is at the lowest point in years.

Since taking office in January, Trumo has focused on immigration in the country with mass deportations and reducing migration to the United States through curbing access to asylum and refugee resettlement.