Supreme Court Takes Up Noem v. Al Otro Lado Border Asylum Case

The Justice Department is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a lower‑court ruling in Noem v. Al Otro Lado that restricted the federal government’s use of "metering" at the southern border, arguing judges have undercut a key executive tool for managing migrant surges. In briefs led by Solicitor General John Sauer, DOJ says migrants stopped on the Mexican side of the U.S.–Mexico border have not "arrived in the United States" under the Immigration and Nationality Act and therefore are not yet entitled to be processed for asylum. The case stems from a 2017 lawsuit by immigrant‑rights group Al Otro Lado and asylum seekers who challenged Obama‑era and later Trump‑era metering practices, which let CBP turn people back from ports of entry when facilities were deemed over capacity. DOJ stresses that administrations of both parties have used metering and warns that the appeals court decision deprives the executive branch of a "critical tool" to prevent overcrowding at ports of entry amid record encounters. The plaintiffs counter that metering is an unlawful "turnback policy" that rewrites asylum law by treating people who present themselves at official crossings as if they never arrived.