Four Supreme Court decisions handed down Thursday touched immigration law, gun rights, and pesticide liability — with two rulings sharply curtailing protections that millions of foreign nationals have relied upon to remain in the United States.
On the question of asylum eligibility, the justices voted 6-3 in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado that physically crossing the border is the threshold moment at which someone "arrive[s] in the United States" under the Immigration and Nationality Act, a standard that determines who may apply for asylum. Justice Samuel Alito authored the majority opinion. Justice Sonia Sotomayor filed a dissent joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson; Justice Jackson also wrote separately.
By that same 6-3 margin, the court ruled in Mullin v. Doe that federal judges lack authority to second-guess the Homeland Security Secretary's decisions about Temporary Protected Status designations — stripping courts of a key oversight role over the program. Alito again wrote for the majority, with Kagan dissenting alongside Sotomayor and Jackson. The practical consequence, SCOTUSblog noted, is that the Trump administration now has a clear path to revoking TPS protections for Syrian and Haitian nationals.
The White House wasted little time celebrating. The White House called the pair of rulings "a tremendous win" for the administration, according to CNN. Spokeswoman Abigail Jackson argued the TPS program "was never intended to be a pathway to permanent status or legal residency," and said President Donald Trump remains focused on "restoring integrity to our immigration system," which she said includes ending "egregious abuses to our asylum system."
Beyond immigration, Thursday's docket produced two additional decisions. In Wolford v. Lopez, the court invalidated a Hawaii statute that had barred licensed concealed-carry holders from bringing handguns onto private property open to the public unless the owner explicitly consented, finding the restriction incompatible with the Second and 14th Amendments. Separately, a 7-2 majority in Monsanto v. Durnell determined that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act preempts state failure-to-warn claims brought against Monsanto over its Roundup herbicide line.
Meanwhile, a separate high-court battle over birthright citizenship continues to draw public attention. A Quinnipiac University poll found that 69 percent of registered voters want the justices to preserve birthright citizenship, The Hill reported. A ruling in that case could arrive as early as Monday, according to the same report.
Informational content only, not legal advice. Consult a licensed immigration attorney.