Texas migrant law in limbo after Supreme Court OK
The law has been blocked again, mere hours after the Supreme Court allowed the state to arrest migrants
What happened
The Supreme Court voted 6-3 Tuesday to allow Texas to enforce a controversial law that lets state authorities arrest and deport suspected undocumented migrants. A divided three-judge panel at the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals late Tuesday blocked the law, overriding a different three-judge panel that had green-lighted it after a federal judge in Texas ruled it unconstitutional.
Who said what
Letting the law take effect would "upend the longstanding federal-state balance of power and sow chaos" in immigration enforcement, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in her dissent. Justice Amy Coney Barrett said the Supreme Court was not the proper venue to review the 5th Circuit's possible procedural abuses. "Mexico will not accept, under any circumstances, repatriations by the state of Texas," Mexico's foreign ministry said.
The commentary
In the few hours the law, SB4, was not enjoined, "some sheriffs were ready to relish an unprecedented state expansion into border enforcement, while others were reluctant," The Washington Post said. "A lot of the local police chiefs here, we don't believe it will survive a constitutional challenge," said Hidalgo County Sheriff Eddie Guerra. And "we have no training whatsoever to determine whether an individual is here in this country, legally."
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
What next?
The 5th Circuit panel will hear arguments Wednesday on whether the law should remain suspended while the Justice Department fights to have it struck down. The merits of the case will be litigated in April.
-
Why is Trump’s alleged strike on Venezuela shrouded in so much secrecy?TODAY'S BIG QUESTION Trump’s comments have raised more questions than answers about what his administration is doing in the Southern Hemisphere
-
Vance’s ‘next move will reveal whether the conservative movement can move past Trump’Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Why recognizing Somaliland is so risky for IsraelTHE EXPLAINER By wading into one of North Africa’s most fraught political schisms, the Netanyahu government risks further international isolation
-
‘Care fractures after birth’instant opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
US citizens are carrying passports amid ICE fearsThe Explainer ‘You do what you have to do to avoid problems,’ one person told The Guardian
-
Supreme Court bars Trump’s military use in ChicagoSpeed Read
-
CBS pulls ‘60 Minutes’ report on Trump deporteesSpeed Read An investigation into the deportations of Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador’s notorious prison was scrapped
-
Trump administration posts sliver of Epstein filesSpeed Read Many of the Justice Department documents were heavily redacted, though new photos of both Donald Trump and Bill Clinton emerged
-
Trump HHS moves to end care for trans youthSpeed Read The administration is making sweeping proposals that would eliminate gender-affirming care for Americans under age 18
-
Jack Smith tells House of ‘proof’ of Trump’s crimesSpeed Read President Donald Trump ‘engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election,’ hoarded classified documents and ‘repeatedly tried to obstruct justice’
-
House GOP revolt forces vote on ACA subsidiesSpeed Read The new health care bill would lower some costs but not extend expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies
