Mullin v. Al Otro Lado · ¶55

The answer is plain. Nothing in the text of §1158(a)(1) or §§1225(a)(1) and (a)(3) manifests an unmistakable congressional intent to require that aliens be inspected and allowed to apply for asylum while they are still outside the United States. We must therefore consider the conduct relevant to the provisions’ focus. And on this score, the difference between the two interpretations favors ours. On our view, the provisions link inspection and the asylum process to what occurs on the U. S. side of the border, while the Ninth Circuit’s and respondents’ interpretation trains its sight on the other side. Because that interpretation would give the provisions extraterritorial reach, we presume that we should not read the provisions that way.

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