On June 25, 2026, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, No. 25-5, holding that under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), an immigrant does not "arrive in the United States" by reaching the Mexican side of the United States-Mexico border without setting foot in the United States, and is thus not eligible to apply for asylum nor is required to be inspected by an immigration officer.
In November 2016, the Department of Homeland Security adopted a practice of "metering" immigrants arriving at ports of entry along the United States-Mexico border, imposing temporary limits on the number of immigrants that could physically cross the border and be inspected and processed within the United States.
Immigrants and Al Otro Lado, an immigration advocacy organization, sued the Government of the United States, alleging that the metering policy unlawfully prohibited application for asylum and inspection by immigration officials. The district court ruled against the Government and was affirmed in relevant part by the Ninth Circuit. The Supreme Court reversed the rulings below and held that an immigrant who is still physically located in Mexico has not "arrive[d] in the United States."
The case turned on the meaning of two statutory provisions, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(a)(1) and 1225(a)(1), which both contain the phrase "arrives in the United States." Section 1225(a)(1) defines lawful entry into the United States to require inspection and authorization by an immigration official after the immigrant "arrives in the United States." Section 1158(a) permits an immigrant otherwise subject to expedited removal upon arrival "in the United States" to indicate an intent to apply for asylum relief and potentially avoid expedited removal.
The Supreme Court explained that the "ordinary meaning" of the statutory text required physical presence within the United States, pointing, for example, to Congress's amendment of the language of Section 1158(a) to replace the phrase "at a land border or port of entry" with "arrives in the United States," and other provisions of the INA which refer to immigrants "off the coast" of the United States or "near a land border."
Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the Court, which was joined by Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Thomas, Justice Gorsuch, Justice Kavanaugh, and Justice Barrett. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justice Kagan and Justice Jackson. Justice Jackson filed a dissenting opinion.
