Supreme Court Strips TPS from 350,000 Immigrants, Bars Border Asylum Claims in Dual 6-3 Rulings
Source: US Supreme Court
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Supreme Court issued two 6-3 immigration rulings on June 25 that together reshape the legal landscape facing Haitian and Syrian nationals and asylum seekers at the southern border. The decisions clear the way for deportations of hundreds of thousands of people previously shielded from removal and allow federal agents to turn away asylum applicants before they cross into the United States.
ANALYSIS
In Mullin v. Doe, the court held 6-3 that Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation is a non-reviewable executive function, stripping federal courts of jurisdiction to second-guess the administration's termination of TPS for approximately 350,000 Haitians and 6,000 Syrians. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, rejected the plaintiffs' discrimination claims, ruling that statements cited as evidence of racial motivation were insufficient to show that race drove the Haiti TPS termination. Justice Elena Kagan dissented sharply, writing that Trump's public statements about Haitians 'fairly shout' racial animus. With judicial review foreclosed, enforcement actions against affected populations can proceed without the injunctive stays that had previously blocked them.
In Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, also decided 6-3 on June 25, the court reversed the Ninth Circuit and held that non-citizens standing on the Mexican side of a port of entry have not 'arrived in' the United States for purposes of statutory asylum eligibility. The ruling reinstates the administration's metering policy, under which Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers can instruct migrants to wait in Mexico indefinitely before processing. The practical effect is that asylum seekers turned away at ports of entry have no statutory claim to protection until they physically enter US territory.
Together the two decisions substantially expand the executive's deportation and exclusion authority. Law enforcement and civil authorities in cities with large Haitian and Syrian communities should anticipate elevated tension, potential protest activity, and increased demand on social services and legal aid organizations. The rulings are likely to accelerate Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operational tempo, particularly in sanctuary jurisdictions that have documented organized resistance to removal.
SOURCES
