WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Texas is allowed for now to implement a controversial new law that gives local police the power to arrest immigrants.
The conservative-dominated court, with three liberal justices dissenting, rejected the Biden administration's ruling that states do not have the authority to make immigration laws and that the federal government has the sole authority to do so. The emergency request was denied.
This means the law can remain in effect while litigation continues in lower courts. It may be blocked at a later date.
“The court has greenlit a disruptive law that upends the long-standing balance of federal and state power,” liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a dissenting opinion. Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson also dissented from the decision.
The majority did not explain why, but one of the conservative justices, Amy Coney Barrett, noted in a separate letter that the appeals court had not yet considered the issue.
“If a decision is not made soon, the applicant may return to this court,” she wrote. Her opinion was joined by fellow conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority.
The law in question, known as SB4, allows police to arrest and impose criminal penalties on immigrants who cross the border illegally from Mexico. It would also give state judges the power to order deportations to Mexico.
The dispute is the latest clash between the Biden administration and Texas over immigration enforcement at the U.S.-Mexico border.
In a separate opinion, Kagan wrote that the Texas law appears to be inconsistent with federal law, noting that “the subject of immigration in general, and the admission and deportation of noncitizens in particular, has long been considered a special state jurisdiction of the federal government. “This is a problem that has been faced for a long time.”
A federal judge blocked the law after the Biden administration filed a lawsuit, but the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law would go into effect on March 10 if the Supreme Court declines to intervene. He said in a short order that he could. The appeals court has not yet decided whether to grant the federal government's request to block the law.
On March 4, Justice Samuel Alito ordered a temporary freeze on the law to give the Supreme Court time to consider the federal government's request.
Attorney General Elizabeth Preloger said in court documents that the law is “completely inconsistent” with Supreme Court precedent from 100 years ago.
“These decisions recognize that the power to admit and remove non-citizens is a core responsibility of the national government and that state laws take precedence when Congress enacts laws addressing these issues. I am,” she wrote.
Preloger added that the appeals court did not explain why it allowed the law to take effect.
He rejected Texas' argument that it could defend its law on the basis that the state was effectively fighting invasion at its borders under the Constitution's wars clause. This article states that a state may not engage in war “unless it is actually invaded” or exposed to imminent danger.
“The surge in unauthorized immigration is clearly not an invasion within the meaning of the national war clause,” Preloger wrote.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton defended the law in court papers, saying the measure complements federal law and the state should be allowed to enforce it.
It added that the Constitution “recognizes Texas' sovereign right to protect Texas from violent transnational cartels flooding our state with fentanyl, weapons, and all manner of brutality.”
Paxton said Texas is “the nation's first line of defense against cross-border violence, forcing us to deal with the deadly consequences of the federal government's inability or unwillingness to protect our borders.” “It has been done,” he said.
The city of El Paso and two immigrant rights groups, Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and American Gateways, also challenged the law and filed their own emergency requests with the Supreme Court.
In 2012, the Supreme Court struck down provisions of Arizona's strict immigration law. Of the justices in the majority in the case, only two remain on the court today: Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Sotomayor.