DistantNews
Support us
Supreme Court backs Trump policy on turning away asylum seekers
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท Argentina /Crime & Justice

Supreme Court backs Trump policy on turning away asylum seekers

From La Naciรณn · () Spanish

Translated from Spanish, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Named sources Outcome reported
  • The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the federal government can enforce a key policy of President Donald Trump's administration, allowing border officials to turn away asylum seekers.
  • The ruling enables the practice of

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a key immigration policy of the Trump administration, granting federal authorities the power to reject asylum seekers at the southern border. The decision, reached with a six-to-three vote and authored by Justice Samuel Alito, allows immigration officials to deny entry to individuals even before they reach U.S. soil.

Nobody has done it better.

โ€” Tom HomanTom Homan defended President Trump's border policy, comparing current numbers to previous administrations.

This ruling specifically validates the "metering" policy, a tactic that limits the number of asylum cases processed at the border and places applicants on a waiting list. Tom Homan, a former acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and a vocal defender of Trump's border policies, hailed the decision. He argued that the policy is effective, citing that nearly 90% of asylum claims result in deportation orders due to fraudulent or unqualified applications.

Nobody has done it better.

โ€” Tom HomanHoman, drawing on his decades of experience in border security, praised Trump's administration.

Homan, who has served under six presidents and ten administrations, asserted that Trump's approach to border security has been the most effective. "Nobody has done it better," he stated, emphasizing that Trump fulfilled his campaign promises. The Department of Homeland Security echoed this sentiment, with Legal Advisor James Percival stating on X that the ruling provides an "important tool to continue protecting our southern border."

Promises made, promises kept.

โ€” Tom HomanHoman affirmed that Trump had fulfilled his campaign pledges regarding border security.

However, Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented, arguing that the phrase "arriving in the United States" should encompass individuals present on the Mexican side of the border. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) suggests the government is not obligated to inspect foreigners remaining in Mexico, nor do they have an inherent right to seek asylum until they physically enter the U.S. This decision is expected to have significant implications for asylum claims at the border.

This decision gives us an important tool to continue protecting our southern border.

โ€” James PercivalJames Percival, DHS Legal Advisor, commented on the Supreme Court's ruling via X.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by La Naciรณn in Spanish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.