metering

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that asylum seekers must cross into the United States to apply for asylum, rejecting the ability to process claims from those waiting at ports of entry on Mexico’s side. The decision, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, upheld the Trump administration’s policy, while Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, arguing it violates refugee protections.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a previous government policy that allowed turning back asylum-seekers at U.S. ports of entry before they reach U.S. soil. Migrant advocacy groups condemned the ruling, expressing concern over the potential resumption of 'metering' at the 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 U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that asylum-seekers must fully cross into the United States to apply for asylum, rejecting the argument that standing at a port of entry on Mexico’s side qualifies as 'arriving in the U.S.' under the Immigration Nationality Act. The majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, emphasized the ordinary meaning of 'arrives in,' while Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, calling the decision a violation of refugee law.

The Supreme Court upheld a Trump administration policy of turning back asylum seekers before they reach the U.S.-Mexico border in a 6-3 decision in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado. The majority, led by Justice Samuel Alito, ruled the policy does not violate federal law by rejecting the argument that asylum seekers 'arrive in' the U.S. before entering. The dissenting justices warned the decision could lead to more dangerous border crossings and deaths.

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, 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 an immigration policy that limited daily asylum applications at the U.S.-Mexico border, overturning a lower court's block. The 6-3 decision upheld the practice of 'metering,' used under Obama and expanded by Trump, which caused long waits for asylum seekers. Advocates criticized it as a humanitarian crisis, while the administration argued it was necessary to manage border crossings.

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.