Supreme Court to decide immigration asylum case
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide a case that would determine at what point an individual seeking asylum “arrives” in the United States.
The Trump administration asked the high court to take up the case, Noem v. Al Otro Lado, to reverse a decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that allowed someone on the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border to apply for asylum.
The 1990 Immigration and Nationality Act allows an individual who “arrives in the United States” to apply for asylum status and be inspected by an immigration officer.
Lawyers for a nonprofit immigrant rights organization said the U.S. Department of Homeland Security instituted a policy in 2018 to reduce the number of asylum seekers allowed into the United States.
In a brief to the court, lawyers for the immigration advocates said border officers “stood just on the U.S. side of the border, identified likely asylum seekers, and physically prevented them from stepping onto U.S. soil.”
The advocates argued that the government illegally held and delayed the processing of asylum seekers at points of entry in accordance with the policy.
The Trump administration argued that the term “arrive’” is not sufficient to describe an individual who is on the Mexican side of the U.S-Mexico border.
“An ordinary English speaker would not use the phrase ‘arrives in the United States’ to describe someone who is stopped in Mexico,” lawyers for the government said in a brief to the court.
Latest News Stories
Support swells across the aisle for $580B BUILD America 250 Act
Revised bipartisan housing bill passes U.S. House, one step closer to becoming law
War of words reignites with Trump, Pritzker, Bailey
Nesbitt asks DOJ to investigate Whitmer’s ties to grant scandal
Senate Republicans’ rebellion in War Powers Resolution vote could sway House vote
Cassidy breaks with Trump on Iran, spending after reelection defeat
Nashville, state spent billions of taxpayer funds drawing Super Bowl
Judge won’t let ConAgra off hook in class action over fish fillet brine
Legal analysts applaud yet are skeptical of American Bar Association’s DEI elimination
Illinois Quick Hits: Bill offering CTE alternative clears senate committee
Workers say mass Spirit Airlines layoffs violate federal law
Bill that tried to kill secret agreements with your tax dollars now faces its own silent death