The court backed the Trump administration in another immigration related ruling on Thursday.
In the 6-3 ruling, the court has said the Trump administration can turn away migrants seeking asylum along the US-Mexico border if they have not set foot on US soil.
Under federal law, a migrant who “arrives” in the US may apply for asylum, which the Trump administration had argued ruled out those stopped on the Mexican side of the border.
Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the court on Thursday, calling the case “straightforward”.
“In ordinary speech, no one would say that a person ‘arrives in’ a place . . . before the person enters that place,” he said in his opinion.
When this case reached the Supreme Court in March, arguments focused on what it means to arrive in the US.
Vivek Suri, an assistant to the solicitor general, arguing for the Trump administration, told the court: “You can’t arrive in the United States while you’re still standing in Mexico. That should be the end of this case.”
A lawyer for an immigrant advocacy group had argued that asylum seekers arrive in the US when they reach a port of entry.
Justice Sonia Maria Sotomayor, who voted against the ruling, called the consequences of the court’s decision “predictable” in her dissent.
“More people will die,” she said. “More people will attempt to cross the border illegally, and some will make it while others will not.”
The requirement to be physically present in the US to apply for asylum was first introduced in 2016 during the Obama administration.
The policy, called “metering” was put in place to allow border control agents to limit the number of asylum seekers allowed to request protection each day on the grounds that the facilities on the US side of a border crossing area were at capacity.
The court’s ruling has allowed Trump, a Republican, to revive the 2016 policy which was rescinded in 2021 under the Democratic administration of President Joe Biden.