Mullin v. Al Otro Lado · ¶40

Respondents contend that our interpretation of the phrase “arrives in the United States” puts too much weight on the Act’s use of the preposition “in.” According to respondents, “in” tells us little about the meaning of §§1158(a)(1) and 1225(a)(1) because “it would make no sense to say someone arrives ‘at the United States’ or ‘upon the United States.’” Brief for Respondents 22. Yet it would be natural to say—and Congress “easily” could have said, had it wanted to adopt respondents’ rule, Knight, 552 U. S., at 188—that an alien must be inspected and allowed to apply for asylum if he “arrives at the border,” or “near” the border, or “upon” a spot adjacent to the border. Congress did not use those terms.

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.