The U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to reassess an old immigration policy that turned away asylum seekers at ports of entry along the southern border of the U.S. President Donald Trump asked the justices to look over a Ninth Circuit decision that said the barrier was illegal.

The Biden administration ended the practice, which the government calls “metering.” However, the Trump administration wants to keep its options open as it cracks down on immigration.

“The Constitution entrusts the power to manage the border to the political branches, not the judiciary,” U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer wrote in November. Citing connections to active policies, Sauer said that “the decision below improperly ‘undercuts Congress’ authority’ to set asylum policy. It also ‘severely intrude[s] on the executive branch’s prerogative to manage our country’s borders.’”

A nonprofit immigrant rights organization, Al Otro Lado, along with 13 asylum-seekers who initiated the lawsuit at the heart of the dispute in 2017, expressed their support for the Ninth Circuit’s ruling and are prepared to defend it before the Supreme Court.

“The government’s turnback policy was an illegal scheme to circumvent these requirements by physically blocking asylum-seekers arriving at ports of entry and preventing them from crossing the border to seek protection,” attorneys for Al Otro Lado and the asylum-seekers said in a statement. “Vulnerable families, children and adults fleeing persecution were stranded in perilous conditions where they faced violent assault, kidnapping and death.”

“Under the logic of the decision below, [Customs and Border Patrol] was not allowed to prevent the entry of an alien who came to the border without an appointment,” Sauer wrote. “Such an alien could claim, after all, that he has arrived ‘in the United States’ and that the government accordingly must inspect him and process his asylum application — effectively allowing him to jump the queue.”