Mullin v. Al Otro Lado (No. 25-5) — government wins on asylum metering

Thesis

1. 1.Question: must asylum seekers presenting at the US border be inspected and entered into the asylum process, or can CBP turn them back via 'metering' policies that limit daily asylum inspections?
2. 2.Government argues 8 USC §1158 (asylum statute) + Article II executive discretion permit metering/turnback. Plaintiffs argue statutory text requires inspection of every asylum seeker who presents at the border.
3. 3.Conservative majority's consistent direction on executive immigration authority: Trump v Hawaii (2018, 5-4 upheld travel ban), DHS v Thuraissigiam (2020, 7-2 upheld expedited removal), Biden v Texas (2022, 5-4 remain-in-Mexico procedural).
4. 4.Roberts / Alito / Thomas / Gorsuch reliable on executive immigration deference; Kavanaugh / Barrett likely to join. The 6-3 conservative majority has not strayed from this pattern in any recent immigration-authority case.
5. 5.Plaintiffs' best path is Kavanaugh writing narrow procedural-protections opinion — preserving turnback authority while requiring minimum process protections. Would technically count as a partial-loss for government but unlikely.
6. 6.9th Circuit ruled for plaintiffs (Al Otro Lado v Mayorkas) creating circuit posture favorable to challenge of metering — but Supreme Court usually reverses 9th Circuit on executive-immigration cases.
7. 7.Risk: Court rules narrowly on standing or related procedural grounds without reaching turnback-authority merits — would defer the question.
8. 8.65% EHIQ probability reflects: high probability of government win on the merits + tail risk of narrow procedural ruling or surprise Kavanaugh defection. Range 60-72%.