Summary of the Article: Supreme court to Hear Case on Trump‘s “Metering” Policy & Asylum Access
This article details the ongoing legal battle surrounding the Trump administration’s “metering” policy, which allowed US immigration officials to limit the number of asylum seekers processed at the border each day, effectively turning manny away. here’s a breakdown of the key points:
* The Policy: “Metering” involved stopping asylum seekers before they entered the US adn refusing to process their claims. It was repealed by Biden in 2021, but Trump has indicated a desire to reinstate it.
* Legal Challenge: The policy has been repeatedly challenged in court. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2024 that “metering” violated federal law,arguing that border agents must inspect all immigrants who “arrive” at authorized border points.
* Supreme Court Involvement: The Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that “arrive” should mean “entering” the country, not simply “approaching” it. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, a win for the Trump administration.
* Arguments:
* Trump Administration: Argues “metering” is a necessary tool for border control and that “arrive” means physically crossing the border.
* Immigrant Rights Groups (like Al Otro Lado): Argue the policy effectively shuts down the asylum process, preventing people from seeking protection.
* Department of Justice: defends metering as a basic tool to manage immigration flow.
* Recent Trends & Context:
* Asylum access has been increasingly restricted since 2016.
* Even after Biden repealed “metering,” access remained limited through the CBP One appointment system.
* trump, upon returning to office, declared a border emergency and again restricted asylum access, claiming a national security threat. He is citing the Immigration and Nationality Act to justify these restrictions.
* Impact: The closure of the border for immigration (related to Trump’s recent actions) has led to a meaningful drop in immigrant arrests at the southern border.
* Ongoing Litigation: Trump’s latest restrictions on asylum are also facing legal challenges (specifically from the ACLU).
In essence, the article highlights a critical legal battle over the interpretation of US asylum law and the extent to which the executive branch can limit access to protection for those seeking it at the border. The Supreme Court’s decision will have significant implications for the future of asylum in the United States.
