The US Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday (March 24) over the Trump administration’s authority to reject asylum seekers at the US-Mexico border under a policy known as “measurement”. The policy allows officials to limit the number of asylum applications processed when crossings are deemed overcrowded.
Legal dispute: What counts as “arrival”?
At the center of the case is whether migrants stopped on the Mexican side of the border can be considered to have “arrived” in the United States under federal law.
Justice Department attorney Vivek Suri, representing the administration, argued: “You cannot ‘arrive in the United States’ while you are still standing in Mexico. That should be the end of this case.”
Judges question the legality of the policy
Sonia Sotomayor has expressed concern over whether the policy undermines protections for asylum seekers.
“They’re letting everyone else in… but they’re not letting in the people who come to the front… who want to get refugee status,” she said.
Drawing a comparison, she added, “Someone on a plane coming in to land at LaGuardia… knocking on the door.”
Origins of politics and legal challenge
The measurement practice began in 2016 under Barack Obama and was formalized during Donald Trump’s first term in 2018. It was later repealed by Joe Biden in 2021.
The legal challenge was filed by the Al Otro Lado advocacy group. In 2024, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court ruled that federal law requires agents to process asylum seekers at official crossings even if they have not yet entered the country.
The Trump administration is signaling a policy revival
The administration has indicated it may revive the metering policy depending on border conditions. In court filings, she argued that “arriving” means physically entering the United States, not merely approaching it.
Immigration battles await
The case is one of several major immigration cases before the Supreme Court. The court recently backed Trump on key measures, including deportations and repealing protections for migrants.
Upcoming hearings will address the legality of limiting first-born citizenship and efforts to end temporary protections for migrants from Haiti and Syria.
A verdict is expected by June
A ruling in the case is expected by the end of June, with significant implications for US asylum policy and border enforcement.
