The Supreme Court granted permission for Texas to enforce a controversial new law empowering local police to arrest migrants, despite dissent from three liberal justices and objections from the Biden administration.
While the law can proceed during lower court litigation, its fate remains uncertain.
Governor Greg Abbott praised the decision, while the White House criticized it for potentially jeopardizing safety and causing confusion at the southern border.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor decried the ruling, warning of its potential to disrupt the federal-state power balance. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett suggested that further judicial review may be warranted.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals expedited oral arguments on the Biden administration’s challenge to the law, indicating a swift resolution.
The law, SB4, allows for the arrest of migrants crossing the border illegally and imposes criminal penalties, including deportation orders to Mexico.
Mexico has stated it will not accept deportations from Texas. Despite preparations for enforcement, a start date has yet to be determined.
This dispute underscores ongoing tensions between the Biden administration and Texas over immigration enforcement.
The law’s conflict with federal law was highlighted by Justice Elena Kagan, who noted immigration as a federal responsibility.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued that the law contradicts long-standing Supreme Court precedent, emphasizing federal authority over immigration.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton defended the law, citing the state’s right to protect itself from transnational violence.
The city of El Paso and immigrant rights groups have also challenged the law, seeking relief from the Supreme Court.
This case recalls a 2012 Supreme Court decision invalidating portions of Arizona’s tough immigration law, signaling a contentious legal battle ahead.
