Ruling Revives 'Metering' Policy
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 25 revived a policy that lets border agents turn away asylum-seekers while they are still on Mexican soil, dealing a blow to immigrant rights groups. The 6-3 decision in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado overturned a lower court order that had blocked the practice known as “metering,” giving the Trump administration a major tool to control the flow of people at the southern border.
Under the policy, Customs and Border Protection officers may refuse entry to a designated port of entry when facilities are at capacity. As applied during Trump’s first term, it effectively capped the number of asylum claims processed each day, forcing thousands of applicants to wait in makeshift camps in dangerous Mexican border towns.
Legal Dispute Over 'Arrives In'
The central legal question was whether an asylum-seeker “arrives in” the United States – as the immigration statute phrases it – when they present themselves at a port of entry on the Mexican side, or only when they physically step onto U.S. territory. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito relied on ordinary usage: “In the ordinary language, no one would say that a person ‘arrives at’ a place – for example, a house, a city, or a country – before the person enters that place.” The Court thus rejected a narrower interpretation by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, read a sharp dissent from the bench. She accused the majority of allowing the executive to “slam the door shut on all fleeing persecution, despite the elaborate screening and asylum system that Congress has enacted and commands.” She also warned that blocking lawful pathways would push desperate people to cross the border illegally.
Reactions and Consequences
The Department of Homeland Security welcomed the ruling, with Chief Counsel James Percival stating, “This decision unlocks an important tool to further secure our southern border.” Immigrant advocacy group Al Otro Lado, which challenged the policy along with 13 individuals, condemned it. Executive Director Erika Pinheiro said the decision “has destroyed the United States’ position as a global leader in advancing the rights of refugees and threatens to serve as a dangerous justification for other countries to unlawfully block refugees seeking safety.” The American Immigration Council called it “a blow to the right to seek asylum” and a violation of international law.
The metering policy was first introduced in 2016 under President Barack Obama and later expanded by Trump. Human rights groups have long criticized it for creating a humanitarian crisis, with thousands of asylum-seekers trapped in precarious conditions in Mexican border cities. Although the policy is not currently active, the decision gives the administration the flexibility to reintroduce it at any time.
The ruling has no immediate effect on active policies, but it removes a legal barrier that had blocked the use of metering. Implementation details will depend on the administration’s next steps, while the decision itself is likely to face scrutiny in international forums.
