The Supreme Court on Thursday handed the Trump administration a tool that could make it far more difficult for asylum seekers to enter the United States.
Read more Supreme Court bars ‘vampire rules’ on gun ownership
Asylum is a form of legal protection available to people fleeing persecution in their home countries if they meet certain criteria. Under U.S. law, an asylum seeker who “arrives in” the US is entitled to apply for asylum, and generally cannot be removed from the country until the individual’s application is processed.
By a 6 to 3 vote, the high court ruled that that federal law allows the government to to stop asylum-seekers from physically setting foot in the United States, effectively keeping them from applying for asylum.
The Obama administration was the first to try stemming the flow of asylum seekers that way, but the lower courts blocked the policy on grounds that it violated federal law by denying asylum to people who otherwise would have qualified for it, had they been permitted to literally put one foot over the border.
Read more Trump is pushing to institutionalize homeless people. That may include veterans
The Trump administration, however, sought to revive the policy, contending that the lower court’s ruling “deprives the Executive Branch of a critical tool for addressing border surges and preventing overcrowding at ports of entry. And on __day the Supreme Court agreed.
Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito ruled that because asylum-seekers are not in the US when they are turned away at the border, they did not “arrive in” the country. Therefore, he continued, the legal protections for asylum seekers have not kicked in.
Writing for the liberal dissenters, Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that border patrol agents speak with all immigrants at legal entry points, and speaking with an agent is effectively the first step in “arriving in” the U.S..
Read more A federal judge in Boston has blocked parts of Trump’s order to limit voting by mail