On 25 June 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two 6-3 immigration rulings that limit judicial review of certain immigration decisions and clear the way for major changes affecting Temporary Protected Status holders and asylum seekers at the southern border.
TPS termination decisions
In Mullin v. Doe, the Court held that decisions to terminate Temporary Protected Status are not subject to judicial review.
The ruling clears the way to end protections for approximately:
- 350,000 Haitians
- 6,000 Syrians
The decision was based on limiting courts’ ability to review TPS termination decisions, not on an endorsement of the underlying policy.
Border asylum and metering
In Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, the Court held that migrants on the Mexican side of the border have not “arrived in” the United States and therefore cannot claim asylum on that basis.
The decision revives border “metering,” a practice that controls or limits when migrants may present themselves at ports of entry.
As with the TPS case, the ruling focused on restricting judicial review rather than directly approving the policy itself.
Practical impact
The two decisions give the administration broader room to act in immigration matters where courts are now limited in their ability to intervene. The immediate effects include a path to end TPS protections for large groups of Haitian and Syrian nationals and the return of border metering for migrants waiting in Mexico.
Source article: www.murthy.com
