# Supreme Court backs Trump asylum restrictions at southern border  
**Published:** 2026-06-25T18:55:24.000Z  
**Source:** [Nebraska Examiner](https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2026/06/25/repub/supreme-court-sides-with-trump-administrations-efforts-to-curb-asylum-claims-at-southern-border/)  
**AI-generated:** yes (claude-haiku-4-5-20251001)  
**Canonical:** https://lincolne.news/article/supreme-court-backs-trump-asylum-restrictions-at-southern-border

The U.S. Supreme Court sided Thursday with the Trump administration's efforts to turn away asylum-seekers who present themselves at ports of entry on the U.S.-Mexico border, according to [reporting from the Nebraska Examiner](https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2026/06/25/repub/supreme-court-sides-with-trump-administrations-efforts-to-curb-asylum-claims-at-southern-border/).

In a 6-3 decision in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, the conservative-controlled court ruled that migrants standing in Mexico do not "arrive in the United States" by approaching a port of entry. [Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-5_86qd.pdf) that a person only "arrives in" a geographic location when entering it, not before.

The legal question centered on whether noncitizens must fully cross into the United States to claim asylum rights or can apply while on Mexico's side of the border. The ruling upholds the Trump administration's position that those who do not physically step on U.S. soil lack the right to asylum processing under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The policy at issue, known as "metering," allows immigration officers to physically block asylum seekers from approaching ports of entry. [Alito emphasized the ruling addresses a "straightforward question"](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-5_86qd.pdf) about geography and entry.

Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a scathing dissent, writing that the ruling "blesses the Executive Branch's decision to slam the door shut on all who are fleeing persecution, despite the detailed inspection and asylum system that Congress enacted and commands." Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined her dissent.

The metering policy, first used by the Obama administration in 2016 to manage asylum surges, was expanded during Trump's first term to all border crossings. A California federal judge ruled it unlawful in 2022, with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming that decision in 2024. The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to overturn the appeals court ruling.

The Trump administration indicated it may seek to revive the policy, with a Department of Homeland Security official calling it an "important tool in border security." The policy is currently defunct, though other asylum restrictions remain in place. Immigration advocacy groups immediately criticized the decision, warning it could increase illegal border crossings by creating incentives for migrants to cross between ports of entry rather than present themselves at official checkpoints.

## Sources

- [Nebraska Examiner](https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2026/06/25/repub/supreme-court-sides-with-trump-administrations-efforts-to-curb-asylum-claims-at-southern-border/)
- [Supreme Court opinion in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-5_86qd.pdf)

---

This article was generated by AI (claude-haiku-4-5-20251001) based on source material from Nebraska Examiner, enriched with 2 web searches. The original source is available at https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2026/06/25/repub/supreme-court-sides-with-trump-administrations-efforts-to-curb-asylum-claims-at-southern-border/.