Supreme Court Rules Government Can Turn Back Migrants at Ports of Entry Without Allowing Asylum Claim

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the federal government can physically turn back asylum seekers at U.S. ports of entry without processing their claims, handing the Trump administration a major victory on its immigration enforcement agenda. The decision resolves a long-running legal battle over whether border officials have the authority to block migrants from setting foot on American soil to request protection.[1][8]

The decision in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado centers on a border-management practice known as "metering." Under this policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers cap the daily number of migrants allowed to approach a port of entry, citing capacity constraints, and instruct the rest to wait in Mexico until space becomes available.[1][2]

Writing for the conservative majority, Justice Samuel Alito concluded that migrants standing on the Mexican side of the border have not legally "arrived in the United States" under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Because they have not crossed the territorial threshold, the Court held they are not entitled to statutory asylum processing or inspection by an immigration officer.[1][3]

"A person arrives in a destination when he enters within its area — not before," Alito wrote, reversing a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that had previously deemed the turnback policy an unlawful withholding of mandatory government duties. The majority opinion emphasized that U.S. immigration law does not apply extraterritorially to individuals who have not yet crossed the boundary line.[1][4]

Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered a sharp dissent from the bench, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Sotomayor argued the ruling allows the executive branch to ignore its legal obligations and "slam the door shut on all who are fleeing persecution," regardless of the detailed asylum system Congress enacted.[1][2]

The decision clears the legal path for the Trump administration to formally reinstate the metering policy, which was originally introduced during the Obama administration in 2016 and expanded into a border-wide directive during Trump's first term before being rescinded by President Joe Biden in 2021.[1][2][7]

Immigrant rights organizations, including Al Otro Lado, which brought the initial 2017 class-action lawsuit, condemned the ruling. Advocates warned the decision violates international non-refoulement obligations and forces vulnerable populations to languish in hazardous conditions while waiting for an opportunity to seek protection.[2][5][6]

While the administration has not yet announced an immediate resumption of the metering policy, the ruling provides the executive branch with sweeping new authority to control access to the southern border during periods of high migration, fundamentally shifting the legal landscape of U.S. asylum law.[1][3][4]