Court strikes down 'metering' of asylum-seekers at US border

More from the article...

... The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California, in a 2 to 1 decision on Wednesday, upheld a lower court's ruling finding that the policy of U.S. border agents turning away migrants at the Southwest border when daily numbers exceeded a certain amount was a violation of federal immigration law.

In a 104-page ruling, the appeals court found that the Asylum Transit Rule -- also known as "metering" -- violated the Administrative Procedure Act, even if the asylum-seekers had not yet crossed into the United States.

"Officials turned away noncitizens without taking any steps to keep track of them or otherwise allow them to open asylum applications, the panel concluded that the metering policy constituted withholding of action," the court found.

The court also ordered the government to unwind past asylum denials to individuals who were turned away. ...

@#3 ... CBP officially rescinded the metering policy in 2021. ...

Likely due to the initial district court ruling that metering was illegal.

Ninth Circuit Upholds Rights of Asylum Seekers, Rules "Metering" Unlawful
www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org

... The lawsuit challenging turnbacks was first brought in 2017 on behalf of Al Otro Lado, a nonprofit legal services organization assisting migrants on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border, and numerous individual asylum seekers harmed by the policy. The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, the American Immigration Council, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Democracy Forward, along with the law firms Mayer Brown LLP and Vinson & Elkins LLP.

In 2021, a district court judge declared the metering policy unlawful, finding that U.S. law requires border officers to inspect and process asylum seekers arriving at U.S. ports of entry and allow them to seek protection in the United States. The government appealed that decision, and today the Ninth Circuit sided with Al Otro Lado and the other plaintiffs, affirming the lower court's ruling. ...

@#5

More from that link...

... While we welcome this ruling, we note that under the Biden administration, the government's turnback practices have evolved and expanded. In 2023, the government unveiled new regulations making most people seeking safety at the southern border categorically ineligible for asylum. Only those able to obtain one of a limited number of appointments via the government's flawed CBP One smartphone app have been permitted to pursue their asylum claims " essentially a new form of metering. Counsel in this case have brought an additional lawsuit challenging turnbacks of asylum seekers without CBP One appointments. That litigation remains ongoing. While the 2023 rule provided certain narrow exceptions for people unable to obtain a CBP One appointment, the administration published new regulations in June 2024 that scaled back these exceptions and imposed additional barriers to people seeking protection.

"Today's ruling affirms what we know to be true," said Melissa Crow, Director of Litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS). "Our government has a legal duty to provide a fair and meaningful legal process to all people seeking safety at our border, no matter what. Border agents cannot arbitrarily turn people back to Mexico, a practice that violates our laws, exacerbates chaos at the border, and places refugees directly in harm's way. The administration should take today's ruling to heart.

It is past time for our government to end these draconian practices and establish a fair, dignified, and humane asylum process at the southern border." ...