The United States Supreme Court will examine whether a Nigerian man who says he was forced to cook for members of a separatist group can be denied asylum on grounds of providing material support to terrorism, a case that could reshape how American immigration law treats people accused of assisting terrorist organisations.

The court agreed on Tuesday to hear the Trump administration’s appeal seeking to reinstate the denial of asylum to Izuchukwu Ozurumba, whose case centres on whether preparing meals for members of the Unknown Gunmen amounts to supporting terrorist activities under US law.

Ozurumba maintains that he was compelled to work at the group’s camp in southern Nigeria and was not a willing supporter of its activities. The Supreme Court’s decision could determine how broadly immigration authorities can interpret the legal concept of “material support” when assessing asylum applications.

The case will be considered during the court’s current term, which began on October 5 and is scheduled to run until late June 2027.

How the case began

Ozurumba’s legal troubles began after he accepted a job offer in 2022 and travelled to a remote camp near Lagos, where he later discovered that the facility was operated by the Unknown Gunmen, according to court records.

He said the group’s leaders forced him to prepare meals and prevented him from leaving freely. His lawyers argued that he was held against his will, worked without pay and faced threats after attempting to escape.

After about six months, Ozurumba escaped from the camp and returned to Lagos. He subsequently fled to Venezuela, where he said the threats continued, before travelling to the United States and entering the country across its southern border in July 2023.

He later applied for asylum and other forms of protection against deportation.

An American immigration judge rejected his application in March 2024, ruling that cooking for the group’s leaders constituted material support for a terrorist organisation under US immigration law. The decision was upheld by the Board of Immigration Appeals later that year.

Ozurumba was deported to Nigeria in April 2025 while his legal challenge was still ongoing.

Appeals court ruled in his favour

The case took a different turn in September 2025 when the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled in Ozurumba’s favour, overturning the earlier decision and sending the matter back for further proceedings.

The appeals court found that the evidence did not establish that his forced cooking amounted to material support for terrorism under the relevant immigration provision.

It described him as a captive labourer whose work had no demonstrated connection to the planning or execution of terrorist activities.

The ruling distinguished between providing a basic service under coercion and knowingly supplying assistance that enables a terrorist organisation to carry out its operations.

The Trump administration challenged that interpretation, arguing that providing meals to members of a terrorist organisation constitutes material support, just as supplying fuel for its vehicles would.

The Justice Department warned that allowing the appeals court’s decision to stand could make it more difficult for the government to exclude foreign nationals deemed to have links to terrorism.

Wider implications for asylum seekers

The Supreme Court’s intervention places the boundaries of US immigration law at the centre of a dispute involving coercion, individual responsibility and national security.

Under the law, certain forms of material support for designated terrorist organisations can make non-US citizens ineligible for asylum and other immigration protections. The dispute is whether Ozurumba’s circumstances fall within that prohibition despite his claim that he was forced to perform the work.

His lawyers have argued against an interpretation that treats any assistance to a terrorist organisation as disqualifying, regardless of the circumstances or the extent to which the assistance contributes to terrorist activities.

The justices’ ruling could have consequences beyond Ozurumba’s case, influencing how immigration officials and courts assess claims involving people who performed services for armed groups under threats or coercion.

The court is expected to hear arguments and issue a decision by the end of its current term, potentially settling a significant question about the relationship between forced labour and the legal definition of support for terrorism.