The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 6-3 that the Trump administration may resume the practice of asylum metering at the southern border, overturning a lower court injunction that blocked the policy. Metering, which limits the number of migrants who can apply for asylum each day, was first introduced under the Obama administration and expanded during Trump's first term. The decision marks a significant victory for the administration's efforts to control border crossings, though the policy is not currently active and border encounters have sharply declined under recent restrictions.
The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for the Trump administration to reinstate a controversial border policy known as asylum metering, which restricts the daily number of migrants allowed to request asylum at official ports of entry.
In a 6-3 decision, the justices reversed a lower court order that had blocked the practice, determining that the government has the authority to implement such limits. The policy, originally introduced under President Barack Obama in response to a surge of Haitian migrants at the San Diego-Tijuana crossing, was later expanded during Donald Trump's first presidency.
Advocates argue that metering created a humanitarian crisis, forcing thousands of asylum seekers to wait for months in makeshift camps along the border in often dangerous conditions. The Trump administration maintains that metering is a necessary tool for managing border security and has been used by administrations of both parties.
The ruling aligns with the conservative majority's view that individuals who have not yet entered the United States are not entitled to asylum screenings, as articulated by Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote, A guest does not arrive in a house when he knocks on the front door. In a sharp dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the decision extinguishes the light of the torch of the Statue of Liberty and could incentivize illegal crossings by undermining legal pathways.
The policy lapsed in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic and was formally rescinded by President Joe Biden in 2021. A federal judge later ruled that metering violated asylum seekers rights and federal law, a decision that was upheld by a divided appeals court panel before the Supreme Court intervened.
Since Trump's return to office, border encounters have dropped dramatically, with U.S. Customs and Border Protection reporting an average of just 114 daily encounters at southwest ports in May 2025, compared to peaks over 1,700 in May 2024. Despite the low current numbers, the administration views the Courts ruling as an important tool for future border management. Immigration advocates expressed deep disappointment, warning that reinstating metering will endanger vulnerable migrants and lead to further loss of life
Please follow us on Google to support usSupreme Court Asylum Metering Trump Administration Immigration Policy Border Security
Singapore Latest News, Singapore Headlines
Similar News: You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
US Supreme Court Rules Against Corporate Liability for Overseas Human Rights Abuses Under Alien Tort StatuteThe US Supreme Court has limited the Alien Tort Statute, ruling in a 6-3 decision that corporations cannot be held liable for aiding and abetting human rights violations abroad. The case involved allegations that Cisco Systems helped China persecute Falun Gong practitioners through its surveillance technology.
Read more »
Pakistani Anti-Terrorism Court Sentences Activist Mahrang Baloch to Life in PrisonA Pakistani anti-terrorism court has sentenced prominent civil rights activist Mahrang Baloch and an associate to life in prison over the killing of a paramilitary soldier during a protest.
Read more »
South Korean Court Orders Arrest of Shincheonji Founder Lee Man-hee for Alleged Political ManipulationA Seoul court has issued an arrest warrant for Lee Man-hee, the 95-year-old founder of the controversial Shincheonji Church, for allegedly orchestrating a large-scale scheme to infiltrate a major political party with his followers, violating laws separating religion and state.
Read more »
Paris Court Orders TotalEnergies to Disclose Consumer Emissions in Landmark Climate RulingIn a pioneering decision, a French court has ordered TotalEnergies to report on greenhouse gas emissions from the use of its oil and gas products under the nation's corporate duty of vigilance law, marking the first time such legislation has been applied to climate change. While the ruling stops short of mandating production cuts, it requires the company to assess climate risks within six months and could set a precedent for corporate accountability across Europe, coinciding with extreme heatwaves that underscore the urgency of climate action.
Read more »