Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-954_7l48.pdf
Page Number: 18

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

13 

Opinion of the Court 

the [Secretary] may return the alien to that territory pend-
ing a proceeding under section 1229a.”  Section 1225(b)(2)(C) 
plainly confers a discretionary authority to return aliens to 
Mexico during the pendency of their immigration proceed-
ings.  This Court has “repeatedly observed” that “the word 
‘may’ clearly connotes discretion.”  Opati v. Republic of Su-
dan, 590 U. S. ___, ___ (2020) (slip op., at 10) (emphasis in 
original); see also, e.g., Weyerhaeuser Co. v. United States 
Fish and Wildlife Serv., 586 U. S. ___, ___ (2018) (slip op., 
at 14); Jama v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 543 
U. S. 335, 346 (2005).  The use of the word “may” in section 
1225(b)(2)(C) thus makes clear that contiguous-territory re-
turn is a tool that the Secretary “has the authority, but not 
the duty,” to use.  Lopez v. Davis, 531 U. S. 230, 241 (2001).
Respondents and the Court of Appeals concede this point.
Brief  for  Respondents  21  (contiguous-territory  return  is  a 
“discretionary authority”); 20 F. 4th, at 996, n. 18 (“It’s ob-
viously  true  that  §1225(b)(2)(C)  is  discretionary.”).    They
base  their  interpretation  instead on  section 1225(b)(2)(A), 
which provides that, “in the case of an alien who is an ap-
plicant for admission, if the examining immigration officer 
determines that  an  alien  seeking  admission  is  not  clearly 
and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted, the alien shall
be detained for a proceeding under section 1229a of this ti-
tle.”  Respondents and the Court of Appeals thus urge an
inference  from  the  statutory  structure:  Because  section 
1225(b)(2)(A) makes detention mandatory, they argue, the 
otherwise-discretionary 
in  section 
1225(b)(2)(C) becomes mandatory when the Secretary vio-
lates that detention mandate.   

return  authority 

The problem is that the statute does not say anything like
that.  The statute says “may.”  And “may” does not just sug-
gest discretion, it “clearly connotes” it.  Opati, 590 U. S., at 
___ (slip op., at 10) (emphasis in original); see also Jama, 
543  U. S.,  at  346  (“That  connotation  is  particularly  apt 
where, as here, ‘may’ is used in contraposition to the word