Supreme Court Weighs in on Controversial Metering Policy at U.S. Border

The U.S. Supreme Court appeared sympathetic towards the Trump administration's efforts to revive 'metering,' a policy that limits asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border. This legal challenge, opposed by immigrant advocacy group Al Otro Lado, questions if asylum seekers stopped on the Mexican side have technically 'arrived' in the U.S.

The U.S. Supreme Court justices showed support on Tuesday for President Donald Trump's administration in its defense of the right to limit asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border when crossings are deemed too overwhelmed. The debate centers on the 'metering' policy, previously abolished by President Joe Biden in 2021.

This controversial policy enabled U.S. immigration officials to stop processing asylum claims at the border indefinitely, a decision challenged in the lower courts. The Trump administration is appealing a ruling that labeled the policy a violation of federal law. The court, holding a conservative majority, must decide if asylum seekers stopped on the Mexican side have technically 'arrived' in the U.S.

During the proceedings, Justice Department lawyer Vivek Suri argued for the Trump administration, while immigrant advocacy group Al Otro Lado's attorney, Kelsi Corkran, pressed the legality of stopping asylum seekers outside official entry ports. Justices are expected to deliver a decision by June.

(With inputs from agencies.)