Particle.news
Download on the App Store

Supreme Court Takes Up Border 'Metering' Case on When Asylum Seekers 'Arrive'

The justices will decide if contact with U.S. officers on the Mexican side triggers inspection obligations, a ruling that could redefine future border management even though the policy was rescinded.

Overview

  • On Nov. 17, the Supreme Court granted review in Noem v. Al Otro Lado, with arguments expected in late winter or early spring and a decision likely by the end of June.
  • The case turns on whether a noncitizen has "arrived in" the United States for asylum purposes upon encountering officials at a port of entry on the Mexican side under 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158 and 1225.
  • A 2–1 Ninth Circuit panel held that presenting to U.S. officers at a port of entry constitutes arrival and requires inspection and processing, and the court declined en banc rehearing over multiple dissents.
  • The Justice Department, led by Solicitor General D. John Sauer, argues the ruling misreads the statute and strips the Executive Branch of a tool to manage surges, saying metering should remain an option.
  • Plaintiffs including Al Otro Lado contend metering unlawfully blocked access to asylum, note the practice was rescinded in 2021, and argue the dispute has limited present practical effect.