Supreme Court Reviews Trump’s Rescinded Asylum-Seeker Border Policy
The Supreme Court is set to review a contentious immigration policy implemented during the Trump administration. This case marks a significant moment in immigration policy for the current term. The policy in question involves the practice of denying entry to potential asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Background on the Asylum Policy
In 2018, the Trump administration enforced a policy known as “metering.” This practice allowed border officials to turn away asylum seekers before they could enter the United States. Federal laws mandate that all asylum seekers arriving at designated ports must be processed. However, “metering” obstructed this legal requirement.
Lawsuit Against the Policy
A lawsuit was filed in California by Al Otro Lado, an immigrant rights organization, alongside several asylum seekers who challenged the legality of this policy. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the migrants, stating that federal law necessitates the inspection of asylum seekers upon arrival, even if they remain outside U.S. territory.
Government’s Appeal to the Supreme Court
The Trump administration sought to overturn this ruling and appealed to the Supreme Court in July. Their argument asserts that a person can only be considered to have “arrived” in the U.S. if they are physically within American borders. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer emphasized this interpretation during the appeal.
Current Administration’s Stance
Since taking office, the Biden administration has rescinded the “metering” policy. Now, individuals seeking asylum are required to schedule an appointment before reaching a port of entry. Al Otro Lado contends that the legal ramifications of the case are minimal as current policies differ significantly. Nonetheless, the Trump administration argues that the option to reinstate “metering” in the future should remain available to any administration.
Implications of the Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court’s decision to hear this case represents a significant win for Trump, regardless of the outcome. The high court is expected to hear arguments next year. A ruling is anticipated by the end of June.
- 2018: Introduction of “metering” policy by the Trump administration.
- California lawsuit: Filed by Al Otro Lado and asylum seekers challenging the policy.
- Ruling: 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of asylum seekers.
- Biden administration: Rescinded “metering,” now requires appointments for asylum applications.
- Supreme Court hearing: Scheduled for next year with a decision due by June.
