No. 19-161October Term 2019Decided Jun 25, 2020Updated Sep 4, 2026
Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam
The case tested whether Congress could sharply limit federal-court review of an expedited-removal decision for this asylum seeker.
Case status
Decided 7-2 · June 25, 2020 · Opinion by Justice Alito
Read the opinion (PDF)- Current stage
- Decided
- Latest event
- Decision released Jun 25, 2020
- What it's about
This case involved a Sri Lankan asylum seeker who was caught shortly after crossing the border and was placed in expedited removal after asylum officials and an immigration judge found he did not show a credible fear of persecution. The Court considered whether federal law could sharply limit habeas review of that decision without violating the Constitution.
Question presented
Whether, as applied to respondent, Section 1252(e)(2) is unconstitutional under the Suspension Clause.
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit / Decision released Jun 25, 2020
- Area
Immigration
Decision
What the Court decided
The case tested whether Congress could sharply limit federal-court review of an expedited-removal decision for this asylum seeker.
Impact
The case concerns asylum seekers caught soon after crossing the border who receive negative credible-fear decisions. It addresses how much access they have to federal courts to challenge expedited-removal decisions.
Not official Court text.
Vote
- Vote split
- 7-2
- Majority author
- Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
Majority
- Samuel A. Alito, Jr.(author)
- John G. Roberts, Jr.
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg
- Neil Gorsuch
- Brett M. Kavanaugh
- Clarence Thomas(concurring, author)
- Stephen G. Breyer(concurring, author)
Dissenting
- Sonia Sotomayor(author)
- Elena Kagan
Opinion documents
Briefing
What it's about
The Court decided whether a federal law limiting habeas review (a court challenge to detention or removal) was unconstitutional as applied to Thuraissigiam. He was a Sri Lankan asylum seeker placed in expedited removal after officials found he had not shown a credible fear of persecution.
Vote
Impact
The case concerns asylum seekers caught soon after crossing the border who receive negative credible-fear decisions. It addresses how much access they have to federal courts to challenge expedited-removal decisions.
What's next
The Court has finished its action in this case. Its decision ends the Supreme Court proceedings on this docket.
What was at stake in DHS v. Thuraissigiam?
The case asked whether limits on federal-court habeas review of Thuraissigiam's expedited-removal decision violated the Suspension Clause.
Who could be affected by DHS v. Thuraissigiam?
Asylum seekers caught shortly after crossing the border and found not to have a credible fear of persecution could be affected.
What happens next in DHS v. Thuraissigiam?
The Supreme Court has finished this case. The decision ends proceedings before the Court on this docket.
Timing
Decided June 25, 2020
The Court released its decision on June 25, 2020 without hearing oral argument.
Documents
Activity
Docket activity4
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Sep 4, 2026 | Generated
Brief added: Questions Presented
May 24, 2026 | Court records
Opinion added: opinion
Jun 25, 2020 | Court records
Brief added: Petition
Aug 2, 2019 | Court records
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Sep 4, 2026
- Method
- Methodology
Primary materials10
Supreme Court docket 19-161
docket | Jul 25, 2026
Primary case document
Supreme Court document | Jul 25, 2026
CourtListener docket record
docket | Jul 25, 2026
Questions Presented
brief | May 24, 2026
Opinion
opinion | Jun 25, 2020
Petition
brief | Aug 2, 2019
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Sep 4, 2026
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Sep 4, 2026
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Sep 4, 2026
SupremeCourt.gov
official | Sep 4, 2026