Supreme Court rules Trump can turn back asylum seekers at the U.S. border

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Thursday that the Trump administration can revive a border practice that lets officials turn away some asylum seekers before they physically enter the United States.

The decision turns on a threshold question in asylum law: whether people waiting on the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border have legally “arrived in the United States” for purposes of starting the asylum process. By siding with the administration, the court cleared the way for a practice that had been blocked by lower courts and later rescinded by the Biden administration.

The case involves the so-called metering policy, a border-processing practice that limits how many people can be handled at ports of entry at a given time. Supporters say it is a tool for managing overwhelmed crossings. Critics say it can strand vulnerable migrants in dangerous conditions in Mexico while they wait for processing.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.

How the policy developed

The metering policy was first used under President Barack Obama in 2016 and then expanded under President Donald Trump. The Biden administration rescinded it in 2021 after lower courts had found the practice unlawful.

Immigration advocates, including Al Otro Lado, argued that federal law requires asylum seekers to be processed when they present themselves at the border, even if they have not yet been admitted into the country. The government argued that people still in Mexico have not legally arrived in the United States and can be turned back until they cross the border.

The Supreme Court reversed the lower-court rulings and accepted that narrower government view, a result that could shape future disputes over when asylum rights attach at the border.

What changes now

The immediate practical effect is that the Trump administration may be able to restore a policy that lets border officials slow or limit processing at ports of entry. That could mean more asylum seekers waiting in Mexico if officials decide to use the practice again.

Department of Homeland Security officials welcomed the ruling, according to AP and Axios. Axios quoted DHS General Counsel James Percival as saying the government had to go to the Supreme Court to vindicate the principle that a person is not in the United States until physically in the country.

The decision also matters beyond this one policy. The court’s reasoning on what counts as “arrival” could be cited in other immigration cases involving border enforcement, port-of-entry processing and the timing of asylum claims.

What happens next

The next question is operational: whether the Trump administration will quickly reinstate metering or issue new guidance for border agencies. U.S. Customs and Border Protection would then have to decide how to handle people arriving at ports of entry when processing capacity is limited.

Further litigation is also possible. Immigration advocates could try to narrow the ruling or block its implementation, especially if officials move rapidly to restart the practice.

For now, the ruling marks a major shift in who can seek asylum at the border and when the process can begin.

,