Supreme Court Weighs Revival of Controversial 'Metering' Policy

The Supreme Court is debating the revival of 'metering,' an immigration policy used to limit asylum seekers at the US-Mexico border. While some justices appear open to the Trump administration's arguments, others question the policy's legality. The policy impacts the number of migrants who can apply for asylum.

The Supreme Court is currently deliberating whether the Trump administration should be permitted to reinstate 'metering,' an immigration policy that capped the number of asylum seekers allowed at US-Mexico border crossings. While the policy aimed to manage the influx of migrants, critics argue it led to a humanitarian crisis, forcing many into precarious conditions in Mexican camps.

During deliberations, conservative justices seemed receptive to the Justice Department's push to overturn lower-court rulings that deemed metering illegal. Justices are divided, with some questioning the policy's fairness and implications for those crossing the border legally versus illegally.

Migrants' advocates argue that asylum access is protected by the Immigration and Nationality Act, suggesting that anyone arriving at a US port of entry should apply for asylum. The case not only tests the boundaries of immigration law but also reflects broader discussions about asylum policies in the United States.