WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday said Texas can enforce its new law making illegal border crossings a state crime.
The majority did not explain its decision to allow Texas to enforce the law against the wishes of the Biden administration. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the ruling.
Texas claims Senate Bill 4 is essential in its effort to deter illegal border crossings. Governor Greg Abbott claims the state has a constitutional right to protect itself from an invasion of migrants from the southern border.
SB 4 hands federal regulatory authority over immigration to state law enforcement officers. The controversial law makes illegal border crossings a state crime, allowing state officials to detain and deport anyone who enters the state unlawfully.
Individuals suspected of crossing the border illegally must show lawful status — like asylum or enrollment in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program — to avoid deportation. Anyone found to violate state court deportation orders could face up to 20 years in state prison.
Two immigrant rights advocacy groups and El Paso County sued the state Department of Public Safety shortly after Abbott signed the bill into law in December. The advocacy groups claim the law will impede their efforts to aid asylum seekers, and the county argues the law will strain its jail system.
The Justice Department joined the suits, arguing the law infringes federal immigration authority.
U.S. District Court Judge David Alan Ezra blocked the state from enforcing its new law. Ezra said states can’t exercise immigration enforcement authority unless given that power by the federal government.
Texas appealed to the conservative Fifth Circuit, which reversed and said the state could enforce its law.
The Biden administration asked the Supreme Court for emergency intervention to prevent Texas from enforcing the law. U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said the law would upend the status quo on the border and damage the country’s relationship with its neighbors.
Texas said its law is a result of the government’s dereliction of duty that the state had been forced to shoulder the burden.
“Today, the court invites further chaos and crisis in immigration enforcement,” Sotomayor wrote in a dissent joined by Jackson.
Sotomayor said the court was allowing Texas to upend the longstanding federal-state balance of power. She noted the only court to consider the law found it unconstitutional. Sotomayor said the appeals court abused its discretion by reversing the lower court ruling and the Supreme Court should not have endorsed that decision.
“The Fifth Circuit abused its discretion, and this court makes the same mistake by permitting a temporary administrative stay to alter the status quo that has existed for over a century,” Sotomayor wrote.
Sotomayor said enforcing the law will have disruptive real-world effects. She said Texas’ deportation of migrants will irreparably derail ongoing negotiations with Mexico on border crossings. The law will also violate the federal government’s treaty obligations with Mexico and hamper the government’s efforts to protect migrants fleeing persecution.
Kagan wrote her own dissent, finding the Biden administration had met the court’s requirements for a stay. She said a court’s unreasoned opinion — referring to the Fifth Circuit’s ruling — shouldn’t “spell the difference between respecting and revoking long-settled immigration law.”
In her concurrence, which Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined, Justice Amy Coney Barrett said the case came to the court in an unusual posture since the Fifth Circuit issued a temporary administrative stay instead of a stay pending appeal. Barrett said it was not the court’s role to interfere with a temporary administrative stay but argued the court should review the requirements for granting a stay pending appeal another time.
The Biden administration said it fundamentally disagreed with the court's order. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said SB 4 will make communities in Texas less safe while burdening law enforcement and creating more chaos at the border.
"SB 4 is just another example of Republican officials politicizing the border while blocking real solutions," Jean-Pierre said in a statement.
The White House also called for congressional Republicans to pass the bipartisan border security bill.
Follow @KelseyReichmann
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
Alabama IVF May 6, 2024 -
