The Supreme Court’s Thursday decision to restrict asylum applications, hailed by immigration hawks, could actually end up increasing illegal crossings, according to the three dissenting justices and immigration nonprofit involved in the case. On Thursday, the Supreme Court held in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado that migrants must physically set foot in the United States in order to be eligible for asylum, reversing lower court rulings that had required the government to process certain asylum seekers tu
Trump scores SCOTUS asylum win — but liberal justice warns it could backfire at border