The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to announce its decision on the constitutionality of Texas’ border security law, a major concern for Republicans, as early as Monday.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on SB 4, a comprehensive Texas border security law, is expected to be announced by Monday, according to KEYE news.
Earlier this week, the nation’s high court extended the temporary halt on the implementation of Senate Bill 4 (SB 4). While there is a possibility that they might issue another order to further delay the law, SB 4 is currently scheduled to go into effect on Monday at 4 p.m. CST.
Texas law enforcement officers would be granted the power to detain undocumented migrants purely on the basis of their immigration status, a jurisdiction that has traditionally been under the purview of the federal government.
Republicans have lauded the law as a solution to what they perceive as the shortcomings of the Biden administration in effectively addressing immigration and border security. Democrats argue that the law will lead to racial profiling and highlight the Supreme Court’s previous rulings in favor of the federal government on immigration policy.
I think it kind of goes back to what Judge Ezra said at the hearing on S.B. 4 a few weeks ago is that we are not a Confederate state, we are the United States,” said Kristin Etter, director of policy and legal services with the Texas Immigration Law Council. “So, when you are a part of the United States, there are certain federal laws that states have to follow.”
In two recent Supreme Court cases, we can find hints about the court’s upcoming rulings. One notable ruling occurred in January, where the Supreme Court supported the Biden administration in a case against Texas. This decision allowed the federal government to remove the razor wire installed by Governor Greg Abbott’s Operation Lone Star initiative.
In a surprising turn of events, the court made a unanimous decision to reject the efforts of multiple states in blocking former President Donald Trump from appearing on the ballots in November. This decision may appear unrelated to the previous case, but it carries significant implications.
According to Etter, in the case of Trump, federal election law must be followed. It is not permissible for states to have different procedures and interpretations of federal election law. Similarly, a uniform immigration law is necessary. Senate Bill 4 allows individual states to create, enforce, and apply their own immigration laws, which should not be allowed.
According to Robert Stein, a political science professor at Rice University, the court seems to be aware of the significance of this decision on multiple levels and is therefore not rushing to make a ruling. He believes that the court is intentionally taking its time in order to reach a decision that is not only correct, but also cohesive and has broader support than just a narrow majority. Stein points to the recent Colorado decision, where the court unanimously ruled to bar President Trump from being on the ballot, as an example of this approach.
Read More:
- Is It Illegal to Drive Barefoot in Ohio? Here’s What the Law Says
- 100,000 immigrants transported to sanctuary cities, including New York City and Chicago, by Texas
