SB 4 is now in effect

[baboon]

https://twitter.com/KenPaxtonTX/status/1...8349845734

 

[TX oddball]

About time. Let's get to work.

A divided Supreme Court has lifted a stay on a Texas law that gives police broad powers to arrest migrants suspected of crossing the border illegally while a legal battle over immigration authority plays out

https://www.breitbart.com/news/supr...ce-broad-powers-to-arrest-migrants-at-border/

 

[benenglish]

I'm curious how many more threads will get merged into here.

Oh, and "Yay!"

 

[kbaxter60]

Earlier today, I read the wording of the lower court which originally slapped this one down and it raised some questions for me. I don't have the quote, but it basically said that it was never the intention for the states to interfere with the federal obligation to protect our borders. That makes sense. But what if the feds are NOT fulfilling their obligation? Normally, I like a decision that conforms to the intent of our Constitution. But do justices need to look at the context? IOW, is this working as the framers intended?

 

[MountainGirl]

... Normally, I like a decision that conforms to the intent of our Constitution. But do justices need to look at the context? IOW, is this working as the framers intended?

Nope. Then again, not much is.

ETA - Only the stay was lifted, while the lawsuit continues, but my guess is it wouldn't have been lifted by the Supreme Court if TX wasn't going to prevail in the end. So it's still great news.

 

[oldag]

Texas lawmakers on Tuesday praised the Supreme Court for backing the enforcement of a law that allows local and state authorities to arrest suspected illegal immigrants.

The 6-3 ruling paves the way for Texas to enforce its controversial law, SB 4, which the Biden administration argued was an intrusion into federal immigration enforcement, while it remains pending in a federal appeals court.

Excellent news.

 

[oldag]

I'm curious how many more threads will get merged into here.

Oh, and "Yay!"

At least one. I missed this one.

 

[Younggun]

Earlier today, I read the wording of the lower court which originally slapped this one down and it raised some questions for me. I don't have the quote, but it basically said that it was never the intention for the states to interfere with the federal obligation to protect our borders. That makes sense. But what if the feds are NOT fulfilling their obligation? Normally, I like a decision that conforms to the intent of our Constitution. But do justices need to look at the context? IOW, is this working as the framers intended?

I would say that in order for a state to interfere with federal obligations the Feds would have to first fulfill that obligation. Then a state would have to act to prevent that obligation from being fulfilled.

 

[Renegade]

Cheaper to bus them out of state than to arrest and support them.

 

[WT_Foxtrot]

Looks like an interesting foray into Texit, and one that's got some actual legal authority, not just because.

The next election will determine the path.

 

[Tnhawk]

Cheaper to bus them out of state than to arrest and support them.

In the short term it is cheaper to bus them out of our state. They will still be illegally in our Country and a burden on its citizens.

 

[majormadmax]

Anticipation and anger on Texas border as strict immigration law again on hold​

McALLEN, Texas (AP) — A federal appeals court late Tuesday again prevented Texas from arresting and deporting migrants accused of entering the U.S. illegally, hours after the law briefly took effect.

Before a divided U.S. Supreme Court earlier let the state law take effect while a legal challenge plays out, some sheriffs were ready to relish an unprecedented state expansion into border enforcement, while others were reluctant...

 

[oldag]

Mexico says they will not accept them.

Fine, leave them at the middle of the bridge.

 

[MountainGirl]

So a lower federal court easily tells the Supreme Court no?

Long live the Republic of Texas.

 

[cycleguy2300]

In the short term it is cheaper to bus them out of our state. They will still be illegally in our Country and a burden on its citizens.

And eventually turned into voters or used to increase a state's representation, neither are good for the country.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[kbaxter60]

Mexico says they will not accept them.

We need the Donald back.
"You just got 50 more!"

 

[seeker_two]

Mexico says they will not accept them.

Where's General Pershing when you need him?.....

 

[popper]

if anyone bothers to read the many historical laws on immigration, they will see that most ALL of them are to prevent SLAVERY. With the thousands of illegals, they are/will basically become low-income workers. Unless WE the taxpayer support them (as is presently being done) until we got not dollars left. Perfect plan by Obummer/FJB.

 

[Texasgordo]

Over 100 migrants break through razor wire, knock down guards as they illegally cross El Paso border in wild scene

A group of over 100 migrants attempting to enter the US illegally rushed a border wall Thursday, breaking through razor wire and knocking over guards in the process.

www.google.com

More border news

 

[@TX_1]

Texas can now criminalize unauthorized migration at the state level. This includes the ability to arrest, jail, and deport illegal aliens.
(Received via email from Texas AG Paxton at 9:05 AM) The media is blocking this, have searched everywhere even search engines outside of USA.

"The Supreme Court is allowing Texas to arrest and jail illegal immigrants who cross into the United States unlawfully."