October Term 2019 · Docket 19-161
Can asylum seekers challenge expedited removal in federal court?
The dispute centers on whether federal courts can review expedited removal orders for asylum seekers.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Kneedler argued these aliens lack entry documents and rights.
Gelernt argued the statute eliminates meaningful judicial review.
Sotomayor noted asylum seekers have a statutory right to stay.
Kagan asked if the hearing adequately determines asylum eligibility.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 22-32 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 22-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 36-42 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 36-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 46-50 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 46-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 30-40 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 30-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 38-24 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 38-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 10-22 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 10-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 36-42 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 36-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 28-22 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 28-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 10-20 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 10-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 24-54 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 24-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 8-36 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 8-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 14-26 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 14-26
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of judicial review for expedited removal.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 28-22 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 28-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-22
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 2, 2020.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 10-20 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 10-20
What each side wants
DHS wants courts to reject asylum claims under expedited removal.
Thuraissigiam wants a full hearing to prove his asylum claim.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 28-22 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 28-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-22
What each side says
DHS argues these aliens have no legal right to remain.
Thuraissigiam argues the statute grants a right to asylum.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 28-22 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 28-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-22
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked about the statutory right to stay.
Justice Kagan questioned the adequacy of the hearing process.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 22-32 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 22-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 36-42 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 36-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 46-50 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 46-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 30-40 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 30-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 38-24 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 38-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 10-22 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 10-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 36-42 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 36-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 24-54 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 24-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 8-36 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 8-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 14-26 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 14-26
Why it matters
This case defines the limits of judicial oversight over border enforcement.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 28-22 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 28-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-22
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 22-32 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 22-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 36-42 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 36-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 46-50 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 46-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 30-40 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 30-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 38-24 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 38-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 10-22 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 10-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 36-42 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 36-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 10-20 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 10-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 24-54 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 24-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 8-36 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 8-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 14-26 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 14-26
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 28-22 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 28-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 28-22 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 28-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-22
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.