Supreme Court Today: Immigration Advocates Tell Justices Trump’s Turnback Policy Violated Law

Thousands denied right to seek asylum and forced back into danger; case has implications for refugee rights

March 24, 2026, Washington, D.C. – Immigration advocates argued today before the Supreme Court that the Trump administration’s turnback policy violated federal immigration law. Under the now-defunct policy, immigration officers at official border crossings physically and indefinitely blocked people seeking safety from setting foot on U.S. soil, flouting their legal responsibility to inspect and process those requesting asylum. 

“For more than 45 years, Congress has guaranteed people arriving at our borders the right to seek asylum, consistent with our international treaty obligations,” said Kelsi Corkran, Supreme Court Director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, who argued the case. “Yet this Administration believes that Congress gave it discretion to completely ignore those requirements, and turn back those who are seeking refuge from persecution at its whim. Nothing in the law supports that result.”  

The turnback policy, euphemistically dubbed “metering” by government officials, broke with longstanding practice and violated the law. It denied thousands the right to seek asylum, forcing them to languish in hazardous conditions in Mexico or return to the peril they had fled.

In 2017, Al Otro Lado, a binational organization that provides free legal and humanitarian aid to immigrants, and a group of asylum seekers brought a class action suit challenging the policy, which the courts ruled unlawful in both 2022 and 2024. Although the turnback policy has not been in effect since 2021, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to overturn the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision declaring the policy unlawful.

“The right to seek asylum is not a policy preference or a loophole— it is a promise to human beings in their most desperate hour, a promise forged after the world witnessed the horrors of the Holocaust and said ‘never again’. Seeking asylum is not like taking a number at a deli counter and waiting for your turn,” said Nicole Elizabeth Ramos, Border Rights Project Director at Al Otro Lado, plaintiff in the case. “The people turned away at our border are fleeing rape, torture, kidnapping, and death threats. You cannot tell families running for their lives to go back and wait in danger because their suffering is inconvenient. We brought this case because the United States made a legal and moral commitment to protect people fleeing persecution. The question before the Court is whether that promise still means something — or whether it can be discarded when it becomes politically uncomfortable.”

For over a century, under our immigration laws, government officials have been required to inspect people seeking asylum who present themselves at designated ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border – as they must inspect all noncitizens seeking admission to the United States. This requirement ensures that the U.S. government does not send vulnerable people back to danger without giving them an opportunity to seek protection.

“The government’s turnback policy ran roughshod over our laws and treaty obligations. It fueled chaos and dysfunction at the southern border. And it was a complete humanitarian catastrophe, returning thousands of vulnerable refugees to grave harm,” said Melissa Crow, Director of Litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS). “For far too many, the turnback policy was a death sentence.We are here at the Supreme Court today for them, and for all people who continue to look to the United States as a beacon of hope, as a place where the persecuted may find safe haven. We will never stop fighting for the rights of people seeking safety at our nation’s doorstep.”

“We hope the Court rejects the administration’s cynical attempt to manipulate the meaning of the border to evade the most fundamental protections of international law and to continue to exile vulnerable asylum seekers,” said Baher Azmy, Legal Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “Our humanitarian treaty obligations, forged out of the horrors of WWII, are too important to suffer from the whims of CBP.”

“President Trump’s effort to abandon asylum seekers fleeing dangerous circumstances in fear for their lives is an unlawful overreach that imperils thousands of people – including children – in dire circumstances,” said Skye Perryman, President and CEO of Democracy Forward. “Democracy Forward is proud to work with these brave plaintiffs and our partners to protect the rights of people seeking asylum.”

“The Trump administration’s illegal turnback policy has flouted both U.S. and international law, all while creating massive dysfunction at our southern border,” said Rebecca Cassler, Senior Litigation Attorney at the American Immigration Council. “But most importantly, we cannot forget the people at the heart of this case — the hundreds of thousands of vulnerable asylum seekers who were sent back to danger, and in some cases, death. They deserve justice most of all.” 

For a recording of the press conference on the steps of the Supreme Court following arguments, see here.

For a recording of the interfaith vigil held outside the Court earlier this morning, see here.

For more about the case, see the campaign website, No Turning Back.

###

Al Otro Lado provides holistic legal and humanitarian support to refugees, deportees, and other migrants in the U.S. and Tijuana through a multidisciplinary, client-centered, harm reduction-based practice.  They engage in individual representation, human rights monitoring, medical-legal partnerships, and impact litigation to protect the rights of immigrants and people seeking asylum.

The American Immigration Council works to strengthen America by shaping how America thinks about and acts towards immigrants and immigration and by working toward a more fair and just immigration system that opens its doors to those in need of protection and unleashes the energy and skills that immigrants bring. The Council brings together problem solvers and employs four coordinated approaches to advance change—litigation, research, legislative and administrative advocacy, and communications.

The Center for Gender & Refugee Studies defends the human rights of courageous refugees seeking asylum in the United States. With strategic focus and unparalleled legal expertise, CGRS champions the most challenging cases, fights for due process, and promotes policies that deliver safety and justice for refugees.

The Center for Constitutional Rights works with communities under threat to fight for justice and liberation through litigation, advocacy, and strategic communications. Since 1966, the Center for Constitutional Rights has taken on oppressive systems of power, including structural racism, gender oppression, economic inequity, and governmental overreach. 

The Democracy Forward Foundation is a national legal organization that advances democracy and social progress through litigation, policy, public education, and regulatory engagement. 

The Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection is a non-partisan, public interest organization within Georgetown Law. ICAP engages in litigation, policy, and public education to defend constitutional rights and protect our democratic processes.

The post Supreme Court Today: Immigration Advocates Tell Justices Trump’s Turnback Policy Violated Law appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/kxIfC83
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant