Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 05/30/2025 View Thu 05/29/2025 View Wed 05/28/2025 View Tue 05/27/2025 View Mon 05/26/2025 View Sun 05/25/2025 View Sat 05/24/2025
2024-03-20 -Land of the Free
Supreme Court rules 6-3 to allow Texas to arrest and deport illegals - for now
[American Thinker] So when are immigration policy and immigration law the exact same thing?

Only when you are the Biden administration, which had been desperate to stop Texas from enforcing federal law on an illegals invasion, while trying to pretend that it wouldn't dream of allowing every illegal into the country who wants in, even though that's exactly what it is doing.

Which brings us to the Supreme Court's clarity on the matter this morning.

According to the Washington Post:
The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Texas to begin enforcing, for now, one of the nation’s harshest immigration laws, which opponents say would disrupt more than a century of federal control over international borders.

The law, known as S.B. 4, makes it a state crime for migrants to illegally cross the border and allows Texas officials to deport undocumented individuals. It was passed last year amid a historic surge in border crossings — part of Gov. Greg Abbott’s (R) push to expand the state’s role in immigration enforcement, which historically has been a federal responsibility.

The Supreme Court’s decision was divided and preliminary, with two justices in the majority urging a lower court to quickly decide whether to allow the law to remain in effect while appeals continue. That approach drew dissent from the three liberal justices, two of whom said the majority was inviting "further chaos and crisis in immigration enforcement."

I don't know how it would "disrupt" any "federal control over the border" since there is no federal control over the border. Or more to the point, the federal government, in the name of policy, is literally ignoring the law, which is paramount over policy.

The law says you can't enter illegally.
Posted by Besoeker 2024-03-20 00:44|| || Front Page|| [11140 views ]  Top

#1 "opponents say would disrupt more than a century of federal control over international borders." These so-called "opponents" are undoubtedly all in favor of federal abandonment of its constitutional obligation to protect the states from INVASION.
Posted by Elmaper McGurque1612 2024-03-20 05:39||   2024-03-20 05:39|| Front Page Top

#2 ...aka Pagan Globalists.
Posted by Procopius2k 2024-03-20 07:57||   2024-03-20 07:57|| Front Page Top

#3 Supreme court approves demolition of terrorist's home despite no deaths from attack
Posted by Skidmark 2024-03-20 08:28||   2024-03-20 08:28|| Front Page Top

#4 Oops, wrong post.
Posted by Skidmark 2024-03-20 08:28||   2024-03-20 08:28|| Front Page Top

#5 Well, maybe not.
Posted by Skidmark 2024-03-20 08:29||   2024-03-20 08:29|| Front Page Top

#6 And a Federal judge has already issued a stay.
Posted by Deacon Blues 2024-03-20 09:49||   2024-03-20 09:49|| Front Page Top

#7 "Spin again!"
Posted by M. Murcek  2024-03-20 09:51||   2024-03-20 09:51|| Front Page Top

#8 #6 I really don't get this. After the Supreme Court has spoken, how do these little tinpot dictators issue contradictory orders? I thought the Supreme Court was supposed to be, you know, supreme.
Posted by Tom 2024-03-20 13:46||   2024-03-20 13:46|| Front Page Top

#9 New stay based on a different argument.

I'm not say that's acceptable. Just that it is the explanation.
Posted by M. Murcek  2024-03-20 15:02||   2024-03-20 15:02|| Front Page Top










Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com