A recent decision by a federal appeals court has paved the way for a Texas law permitting state police to arrest individuals suspected of unlawfully entering the country. This ruling comes as the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a longstanding lower court injunction that had halted the law’s implementation since its passage.
The court’s order, issued on Friday, did not delve into the fundamental legal issues surrounding the law, known as Senate Bill 4. Instead, it determined that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the case. Lawmakers enacted SB 4 in response to what they described as an invasion due to unprecedented levels of illegal border crossings, a situation that has since eased.
Traditionally, immigration enforcement has been the sole responsibility of the federal government. However, Texas legislators have sought to challenge this norm with SB 4, which has faced swift constitutional scrutiny from immigrant and civil rights organizations. These groups contend that immigration policing is exclusively under federal jurisdiction.
In a closely contested 10-7 decision, the appeals court concluded that the Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, American Gateways, and El Paso County were not entitled to pursue their lawsuit. The court noted that the plaintiffs had voluntarily incurred costs in their advocacy efforts, which, under recent Supreme Court precedents, did not satisfy the criteria for legal standing. Consequently, the court vacated the earlier injunction that had blocked the law.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton took to social media to celebrate the ruling, asserting, “Texas’s right to arrest illegals, protect our citizens, and enforce immigration law is fundamental. This is a major win for public safety and law and order.”
Senate Bill 4 establishes a state misdemeanor for illegal border crossings into Texas and authorizes law enforcement to apprehend individuals suspected of violating this law. Furthermore, it mandates state magistrate judges to order the expulsion of individuals arrested for illegal entry to Mexico, either in lieu of prosecution or upon conviction.
The Biden administration has contested SB 4, claiming it is unconstitutional, although the Trump administration had previously withdrawn the Department of Justice from the legal battle.
Texas officials have defended the law, asserting that the state has the right to protect itself against illegal immigration, which GOP leaders claim constitutes an invasion. However, courts in recent years have generally dismissed this argument, with immigration advocates expressing concerns that such rhetoric could provoke violence against migrants.
While the appeals court did not address the invasion argument directly, it focused on the plaintiffs’ standing, emphasizing that its decision did not consider the case’s merits. Judge James Ho, in a concurring opinion, argued for Texas’s right to defend itself, referencing claims that certain nations have weaponized migration against the United States.
“If our adversaries are going to weaponize mass migration to harm America as well as other countries, our elected officials are entitled to respond accordingly,” he stated. “And in any event, these are political matters for which elected officials are held accountable by voters, not judges.”
It remains uncertain whether SB 4 will be enacted immediately. Nicolas Palazzo, director of legal services at the Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, criticized the Fifth Circuit for sidestepping the law’s core legal issues.
“By avoiding the core question of S.B. 4’s unlawfulness, it left the road wide open for S.B. 4 to continue its reign of fear and targeted profiling against migrants and their families, undermining safety and security in El Paso,” Palazzo remarked. “We remain committed, however, to continue to challenge S.B. 4 and its abuse of power.”
