Supreme Court to decide immigration asylum case
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide a case that would determine at what point an individual seeking asylum “arrives” in the United States.
The Trump administration asked the high court to take up the case, Noem v. Al Otro Lado, to reverse a decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that allowed someone on the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border to apply for asylum.
The 1990 Immigration and Nationality Act allows an individual who “arrives in the United States” to apply for asylum status and be inspected by an immigration officer.
Lawyers for a nonprofit immigrant rights organization said the U.S. Department of Homeland Security instituted a policy in 2018 to reduce the number of asylum seekers allowed into the United States.
In a brief to the court, lawyers for the immigration advocates said border officers “stood just on the U.S. side of the border, identified likely asylum seekers, and physically prevented them from stepping onto U.S. soil.”
The advocates argued that the government illegally held and delayed the processing of asylum seekers at points of entry in accordance with the policy.
The Trump administration argued that the term “arrive’” is not sufficient to describe an individual who is on the Mexican side of the U.S-Mexico border.
“An ordinary English speaker would not use the phrase ‘arrives in the United States’ to describe someone who is stopped in Mexico,” lawyers for the government said in a brief to the court.
Latest News Stories
Casey-Westfield FCCLA Ranked No. 1 in Region for Service Hours
Senate Bill Secures $1 Million for Casey Sewer Improvements
EXCLUSIVE: 5 largest U.S. cities don’t have enough money to pay bills: report
INVESTIGATION: Wisconsin university closes DEI unit but keeps most staff working on equity issues
Board Approves Updated School Resource Officer Agreement
Casey Advances Housing Strategy with Land Bank Transfers and Inspection Contract
Chicago’s $41 billion financial hole exposes city’s pension crisis
Trump seeks $1B from Harvard in federal funding dispute
Lawmakers react to U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on Prop. 50
WATCH: Senators slam fraud, call for welfare scrutiny in Minnesota
Nurses demand inclusion in professional degree definition
Early voting starts Thursday in most Illinois jurisdictions