SCOTUSblog By Amy Howe 11/17/2025
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to review a ruling by a federal appeals court that, the Trump administration contends, “has already caused—and, if left in place, will continue to cause—‘untold interference with the Executive Branch’s ability to manage the southern border.’” The immigrant rights group and asylum seekers who filed the lawsuit had urged the justices to leave the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in place, telling them that the government’s argument “would empower border officials to render” federal law governing the processing of asylum seekers “wholly inoperable at ports of entry.”
Under federal immigration law, a noncitizen “who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States … whether or not at a designated port of arrival … may apply for asylum.” Noncitizens who arrive at a port of entry and indicate that they want to seek asylum are inspected and processed – that is, screened by border officials and then channeled into the asylum system, which may include either an interview with an asylum officer or proceedings in immigration court.
In 2016, in response to a surge in the number of Haitian immigrants seeking asylum in San Ysidro, outside San Diego, the Department of Homeland Security initiated a policy known as “metering”: Customs and Border Patrol officials turned back asylum seekers before they entered the United States. The policy was expanded to all ports of entry across the U.S. border with Mexico, and it was formalized in a memorandum in 2018.
More:
https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/11/supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-case-on-border-crossings/
