Supreme Court Likely To Revive Obama-Era Rule on Asylum-Seekers
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a landmark immigration case that could restore the executive branch’s ability to "meter" or turn back asylum-seekers at the southern border. The justices will review a Ninth Circuit decision that had previously declared the practice unlawful.
The Conflict Over "Metering"
The practice of "metering"—limiting the number of people who can process asylum claims at a port of entry each day—originated in the Obama administration in 2016 during a surge of Haitian migrants. It was later formalized and intensified under the first Trump administration.
U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer argued in the government's petition that the Ninth Circuit’s ruling "significantly encroaches upon the executive branch’s authority to regulate the nation’s borders." Sauer contends that under the current ruling, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is essentially prohibited from stopping anyone who arrives at the border without an appointment, allowing them to "circumvent the queue."
Allegations of Human Rights Violations
The lawsuit was brought by the nonprofit Al Otro Lado and 13 individual asylum-seekers. Their attorneys argue that the turnback policy is a deliberate strategy to evade legal obligations. By physically obstructing migrants at ports of entry, they claim the government left "at-risk families, children, and adults" in Mexican border towns where they faced "violent attacks, abduction, and mortality."
The Ninth Circuit previously sided with the migrants, rejecting the government's claim that individuals denied entry at the literal gate were not "in the United States" and therefore had no right to asylum protections.
Implications for Modern Border Tools
The Trump administration warns that if the Ninth Circuit's ruling stands, it could jeopardize other management tools, including the CBP One app. This app, launched during the Biden era and still in use, requires migrants to schedule appointments before arriving. If the court rules that any migrant who reaches the border has an immediate right to processing, the appointment-based system could become legally obsolete.
Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin stated that the administration anticipates a victory at the High Court, asserting that they have "consistently upheld the explicit interpretation of federal law."
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments, the decision will likely settle the long-standing debate over whether the Immigration and Nationality Act grants a right to asylum processing to individuals before they have officially set foot on U.S. soil.
'Guilty Of Fraud' - Hammer Dropped On Former First Lady Jill Biden During Live Fox News Segment
McEnany Accuses Jill Biden Of Misleading Americans About Debate Performance
Posted July 15, 2026
Former White House press secretary and Fox News host Kayleigh McEnany accused former first lady Jill Biden of misleading the American public about President Joe Biden’s condition following his widely criticized debate performance during the 2024 campaign.
McEnany made the remarks Thursday during an appearance on Fox News Channel’s “America’s Newsroom,” where she reacted to comments Jill Biden reportedly made in her upcoming book regarding the president’s performance during the debate that ultimately intensified questions about his age and fitness for office.
The discussion began when co-host Dana Perino referenced remarks Jill Biden made immediately following the debate.
At a campaign event after the debate, Jill Biden praised her husband’s performance.
“Joe, you did such a great job. You answered every question,” she said at the time.
Perino contrasted those comments with more recent claims attributed to Jill Biden and raised questions about the apparent inconsistency.
“So now we know that this is what she’s saying in her book,” Perino said. “And the question I would love to ask her is where are you lying then or now?”
McEnany responded by arguing that Jill Biden’s reaction following the debate was inconsistent with her more recent descriptions of the event.
“It’s a great question,” McEnany said.
“That is not the reaction of someone who believes they just watched their husband have a stroke. It is an absolute lie.”
McEnany then accused the former first lady of concealing concerns about the president’s condition from voters.
“It was fraud,” she said.
“What she did fraud on the American public and she’s continuing it by saying she had never seen him like that before or after.”
The debate between Biden and President Donald Trump became a turning point in the 2024 election cycle, with many Democrats publicly expressing concern about Biden’s performance and his ability to continue his campaign.
Questions about Biden’s age and mental sharpness had circulated for years, but the debate intensified those concerns and fueled calls from some Democrats for him to step aside.
During the Fox News discussion, McEnany referenced comments previously made by veteran journalist Carl Bernstein regarding Biden’s condition behind the scenes.
“Dana, you all remember Carl Bernstein, who said he talked to people who knew Joe Biden, loved Joe Biden, supported Joe Biden, and they were adamant that what we saw was not a one-off,” McEnany said.
According to McEnany, Bernstein reported that individuals close to Biden had observed similar episodes before the debate.
“They said it had happened 15 or 20 times prior, him losing his train of thought,” she said.
McEnany also cited a fundraiser Bernstein reportedly described.
“He described a fundraiser where he froze up and seemed to have some type of rigor mortis,” she said.
“This is not something that was a one-off.”
McEnany argued that concerns about Biden’s condition were widely known among those close to him.
“This was well known,” she said.
She then questioned why Jill Biden continued publicly defending her husband following the debate.
“So why did she keep up with the fraud on the American people?” McEnany asked.
The former first lady has repeatedly defended her husband and rejected claims that she or members of his inner circle concealed concerns about his health, Breitbart News reported.
The debate over Biden’s condition became one of the defining political stories of the 2024 election cycle and continued after he ultimately left the race.
McEnany’s comments reflect ongoing scrutiny surrounding what Biden’s family, advisers and top Democratic officials knew about his condition and when they knew it.
Neither Jill Biden nor representatives for the former president immediately responded to McEnany’s latest remarks.
As new books and accounts from those involved continue to emerge, questions surrounding Biden’s final campaign and the decisions made by those closest to him remain a major topic of political debate.
