On Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled that the state of Texas was permitted to enforce its law, known as SB4, that grants local authorities the power to arrest illegal immigrants. The law also gives state judges the ability to order the deportation of said migrants. The conservative majority court ruled, with three dissenting liberal justices, against an emergency request from the Biden administration to prevent Texas from enforcing SB4.
The Biden administration argued that states do not have the power to pass legislation on immigration, claiming that the federal government has the sole authority on the issue. Liberal justices argued allowing Texas to enforce its immigration law would “sow chaos.” “The court gives a green light to a law that will upend the longstanding federal-state balance of power and sow chaos,” liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion.
However, the 6-3 conservative majority court did not offer an explanation for its reasoning. Although, conservative justice Amy Coney Barret wrote in a separate opinion that an appeals court has not yet provided a decision. “If a decision does not issue soon, the applicants may return to this court,” she added.
“Those decisions recognize that the authority to admit and remove noncitizens is a core responsibility of the national government, and that where Congress has enacted a law addressing those issues, state law is preempted,” wrote Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who disagreed with the ruling based on Supreme Court precedent.
Sotomayor further criticized SB4, claiming it would “disrupt sensitive foreign relations, frustrate the protection of individuals fleeing persecution, hamper active federal enforcement efforts, undermine federal agencies’ ability to detect and monitor imminent security threats, and deter noncitizens from reporting abuse or trafficking.”
In a separate writing, Justice Kagan said she would not have permitted the Texas immigration law to take effect, and said the 5th Circuit’s “unreasoned” decision to temporarily allow Texas to enforce the law for over than a month “should not spell the difference between respecting and revoking long-settled immigration law.”
However, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton wrote in court papers that Texas’ legal initiative complements federal law and should be allowed. The Constitution “recognizes that Texas has the sovereign right to defend itself from violent transnational cartels that flood the state with fentanyl, weapons, and all manner of brutality,” he added. Texas is “the nation’s first-line defense against transnational violence and has been forced to deal with the deadly consequences of the federal government’s inability or unwillingness to protect the border,” Paxton added.
"*" indicates required fields
“HUGE WIN: Texas has defeated the Biden Administration’s and ACLU’s emergency motions at the Supreme Court. Our immigration law, SB 4, is now in effect. As always, it’s my honor to defend Texas and its sovereignty, and to lead us to victory in court,” Ken Paxton wrote on X.
“The Supreme Court has ruled correctly and given Texas the authority to detain and jail illegals. Enough of the lawlessness that has plagued our nation. Since Biden refuses to secure the border, red states will step up and do it without him!” Rep. Lauren Boebert wrote.