The Maine Wire
  • News
  • Commentary
  • The Blog
  • About
  • Support the Maine Wire
  • Store
Facebook Twitter Instagram
Trending News
  • Westbrook Man Arrested for Attempted Arson at Portland Restaurant with Molotov Cocktail
  • SCOTUS Allows Federal Gov’t to Turn Away Aliens Seeking Asylum Before They Cross the Border
  • Editorial: Stop the Gaslighting. The People Who Broke It Want Another Chance.
  • Collins’ Defamation Claim Against Platner A Tough Sell, And Why Is She Taking Him Seriously To Begin With?
  • Southern Maine Community College Falsley Told Healthcare Students They Still Required COVID Shots
  • Clinton Family Farmers Take Action after State Regulators Shut Down Their Popular Farm Stand
  • Bobby Charles Challenges Rivals to Reject Lobbyist, CMP, and AI Data Center Money
  • Supreme Court Clears Path to End Haitian TPS, Raising Questions for Thousands Housed in Massachusetts Migrant Hotels
Facebook Twitter Instagram
The Maine Wire
Saturday, June 27
  • News
  • Commentary
  • The Blog
  • About
  • Support the Maine Wire
  • Store
The Maine Wire
Home » News » News » SCOTUS Allows Federal Gov’t to Turn Away Aliens Seeking Asylum Before They Cross the Border
News

SCOTUS Allows Federal Gov’t to Turn Away Aliens Seeking Asylum Before They Cross the Border

Libby PalanzaBy Libby PalanzaJune 27, 2026Updated:June 27, 20263 Comments4 Mins Read
Facebook Twitter Email LinkedIn Reddit
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email

The United States Supreme Court upheld the federal government’s authority to turn away people at the border before they have physically entered the country in a 6-3 ruling Thursday.

Known as “metering,” this policy calls for agents to stand along the nation’s southern border to turn away non-citizens without valid travel documents, including those who claim to be seeking asylum.

First adopted by Customs and Boarder Patrol (CBP) in 2016 as the nation faced a surge of aliens seeking entry at the border, metering was ultimately discontinued by the federal government in 2021.

An immigrants rights group and 13 people seeking asylum challenged the policy in court, claiming that for the purposes of applying for asylum, non-citizens turned away at the port of entry before crossing the border had already “arrived in” the United States.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with this interpretation in 2024, finding that asylum applicants were entitled to legal protection even if their applications are initially denied.

The majority of the Supreme Court, however, disagreed with this understanding of the law.

“We hold that an alien who is standing in Mexico does not ‘arriv[e] in the United States’ by attempting, and failing, to set foot in this country,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion. “An alien ‘arrives in the United States’ only when he crosses the border.”

Alito went on to refute the challengers’ argument that metering violates the country’s obligation under international conventions, as well as the Refugee Act of 1980, to not return refugees facing persecution.

According the Court, this “imposes a duty on nations not to send refugees that are within their borders to certain places. It does not establish … that refugees have a right to enter a nation at the time they prefer.”

The justices also rejected the notion that their ruling would “create perverse incentives for aliens to enter the country illegally.”

“Metering does not permanently bar any alien from arriving in the United States and then applying for asylum,” the Court said. “It merely delays the date when some may enter. Illegal entry, on the other hand, may be expensive and dangerous, and it carries adverse legal effects.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor read the dissent she authored from the bench, according to reports from Politico.

“If someone said, ‘Call me when you arrive in Washington, D. C.,’” she wrote, “it would be logical to call them once you have landed at DCA Airport, just across the river in Virginia.”

“The point,” Justice Sotomayor wrote, “is not that illegal entry always produces a net windfall for asylum seekers; it is that Congress was unlikely to devise a system in which asylum is available to those who unlawfully set foot over the border, but not to those who attempt to comply with the law and are physically blocked from entering at the threshold of a port of entry by an immigration officer.”

Alito responded to Sotomayor’s dissent verbally from the bench, a move that is extremely rare for the Supreme Court, according to reports from SCOTUS Blog.

He said that there would have been “much that [he] would have added” to his oral summary of the majority opinion if he had known she would be speaking at such length about her dissent.

Alito went on to say that metering had been employed “by two different administrations … as a way of dealing with surges” of asylum seekers at the border in an “orderly and humane” manner.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson separately dissented, arguing that the Court should not have granted review for this case in the first place because the government’s metering policy had been rolled back in 2021 and the case lacked “a factual record establishing how metering works in practice.”

This case has been remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s opinion as outlined in Thursday’s ruling.

Click Here to Read the Full Opinion

Previous ArticleEditorial: Stop the Gaslighting. The People Who Broke It Want Another Chance.
Next Article Westbrook Man Arrested for Attempted Arson at Portland Restaurant with Molotov Cocktail
Libby Palanza

Libby Palanza is a reporter for the Maine Wire and a lifelong Mainer. She graduated from Harvard University with a degree in Government and History. She can be reached at [email protected].

Latest News

Westbrook Man Arrested for Attempted Arson at Portland Restaurant with Molotov Cocktail

June 27, 2026

Editorial: Stop the Gaslighting. The People Who Broke It Want Another Chance.

June 27, 2026

Collins’ Defamation Claim Against Platner A Tough Sell, And Why Is She Taking Him Seriously To Begin With?

June 27, 2026
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Login
Notify of
guest

guest

3 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sandy feet
Sandy feet
48 minutes ago

The Democrat’s cannot understand the law of the land, The Constitution. Get a vote at any cost Democrat’s.

1
Captain Dick F/V Old Scow
Captain Dick F/V Old Scow
34 minutes ago

Reality check! It’s The Law the way it was Written!
Get over it.

0
Captain Dick F/V Old Scow
Captain Dick F/V Old Scow
26 minutes ago

Don’t let the boarder gate hit you in the ass on the way back to where you came from.
See ya

0
Recent News

Westbrook Man Arrested for Attempted Arson at Portland Restaurant with Molotov Cocktail

June 27, 2026

SCOTUS Allows Federal Gov’t to Turn Away Aliens Seeking Asylum Before They Cross the Border

June 27, 2026

Southern Maine Community College Falsley Told Healthcare Students They Still Required COVID Shots

June 27, 2026

Clinton Family Farmers Take Action after State Regulators Shut Down Their Popular Farm Stand

June 26, 2026

Bobby Charles Challenges Rivals to Reject Lobbyist, CMP, and AI Data Center Money

June 26, 2026
Newsletter

News

  • News
  • Campaigns & Elections
  • Opinion & Commentary
  • Media Watch
  • Education
  • Media

Maine Wire

  • About the Maine Wire
  • Advertising
  • Contact Us
  • Submit Commentary
  • Complaints
  • Maine Policy Institute

Resources

  • Maine Legislature
  • Legislation Finder
  • Get the Newsletter
  • Maine Wire TV

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS
  • Post Office Box 7829, Portland, Maine 04112

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

wpDiscuz