“Despite this win, many migration experts recognize that U.S. asylum laws need major rewrites to deter future waves of economic migrants who try to get U.S. jobs by claiming persecution in their far-distant homelands.”
(Neil Munro – Breitbart) The decision is a useful win for citizens and border security, partly because President Joe Biden excused his lax border policies and subsequent welcome for 10 million economic migrants by insisting he lacked the authority to curb asylum requests.
The six judges agreed:
This case presents a straightforward question: whether an alien who seeks to enter the United States2 from Mexico “arrives in the United States” when he or she is still in Mexico. In the decision below, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit answered “yes.” That is wrong. In ordinary speech, no one would say that a person “arrives in” a place—for example, a house, a city, or a country—before the person enters that place. The context in which the phrase “arrives in the United States” is used in the immigration statutes at issue here supports an ordinary-meaning reading. So does the presumption against extraterritoriality. We therefore reverse [the Ninth Circuit].
Other SCOTUS rulings
BREAKING: Supreme Court Rules on Endless ‘Temporary Protected Status’ for Aliens – PJ Media
BREAKING: SCOTUS Decides How Far States May Regulate Concealed Carry in Public – PJ Media
The conservative voice and Christian content are being silenced more and more. CRN offers a lifeline to conservative people of faith who are disgusted with social media and the leftmedia for failing to report, even blocking, important news stories that don’t comport with the far left’s narrative. CRN does NOT charge for subscriptions. Sign up HERE (right side of page) to receive news and commentary.