Posted on 03/19/2024 2:53:10 PM PDT by grundle
A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday 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.
The Biden administration is suing to strike down the measure, arguing it’s a clear violation of federal authority that would hurt international relations and create chaos in administering immigration law. Texas has argued it has a right to take action over what Gov. Greg Abbott has described as an “invasion” of migrants on the border.
Opponents have called the law, known as Senate Bill 4, the most dramatic attempt by a state to police immigration since an Arizona law more than a decade ago, portions of which were struck down by the Supreme Court. Critics have also said the Texas law could lead to civil rights violations and racial profiling.
A federal judge in Texas struck down the law in late February, but the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals quickly stayed that ruling, leading the federal government to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The majority did not write a detailed opinion in the case, as it typical in emergency appeals. But the decision to let the law go into effect drew dissents from liberal justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Cities and states should be escorting illegals back to Texas for deportation.
6-3: the six real judges (who can and often do disagree with each other — and worse, sometimes disagree with me ...) vs. the three hacks (who vote in lockstep per their puppet masters).
“A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday lifted a stay...”
I would say that 6-3 is a pretty clear vote. Obviously, not as good as 8-1 would be.
But folks, it’s all in the wording.
What if this case were decided in favor of the Biden Administration by a 6-3 VOTE?
Would it have been described as a divided Supreme Court?
No, it would have been described as a mandate or “harsh reproach” to the state of Texas
3️⃣
I wonder if this ruling allows state,county and municipal police to arrest someone for simply being in the country illegally.One would think that it does...and one would certainly *hope* that it does.
I wonder if this ruling allows state,county and municipal police to arrest someone for simply being in the country illegally.One would think that it does...and one would certainly *hope* that it does.
“gives police broad powers to arrest migrants suspected of crossing the border illegally”
“suspected”
I certainly trust the LEOs to interpret the word “suspected” in a fair manner.
These three bimbos are the reason it took women a long time to be allowed to vote.
Mexico says it won’t take em. I say put em on the trains and stop in Mexico city
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against InvasionUS Const., Art. IV, Sec. 4.
6-3 is not divided.
The walls are slowly collapsing on President Poopy Pants.
Starting right now.
I agree.
Brandon still has control of the fighter jets. Bomb away, idiot.
Too many names in that Brown woman. I got confused. Thanks
The use of the vile & filthy language of the above phrase probably needs to be reported to the administrator...
Think the pilots would carry out the order to attack american citizens?
I think the odds are still in our favor..
for now.
Supreme Court allows Texas to enforce new border law
Associated Press via Mercury News ^ | March 19, 2024 | Lindsay Whitehurst |
Posted on 3/19/2024, 2:53:10 PM by grundle
A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday 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.
The Biden administration is suing to strike down the measure, arguing it’s a clear violation of federal authority that would hurt international relations and create chaos in administering immigration law. Texas has argued it has a right to take action over what Gov. Greg Abbott has described as an “invasion” of migrants on the border.
Opponents have called the law, known as Senate Bill 4, the most dramatic attempt by a state to police immigration since an Arizona law more than a decade ago, portions of which were struck down by the Supreme Court. Critics have also said the Texas law could lead to civil rights violations and racial profiling.
A federal judge in Texas struck down the law in late February, but the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals quickly stayed that ruling, leading the federal government to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The majority did not write a detailed opinion in the case, as it typical in emergency appeals. But the decision to let the law go into effect drew dissents from liberal justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.