Author Topic: Texas challenge to Biden deportation priorities goes to U.S. Supreme Court  (Read 325 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,274
Houston Chronicle by Benjamin Wermund 11/29/2022

 The Supreme Court on Tuesday is set to hear arguments in a Texas challenge to President Joe Biden’s immigration enforcement priorities, a key piece of the Republican-led state’s strategy of using the courts to stymie presidential power that was unheard of just a decade ago.

The case is a significant test of the president’s power to set immigration policy, and a ruling for Texas would mark a major departure from how the courts have long handled the issue. For years, presidents have set priorities for which immigrants their administrations would detain and deport. But Texas has so far succeeded in stopping that for the first time.

“If the Supreme Court were to rule in Texas's favor, this would be a landmark 180-degree shift from about the last 140 years of immigration law,” said Leon Fresco, an immigration attorney based in Washington, D.C. “It would replace the principle that presidents get broad say over how to enforce the immigration laws.”

The case centers on the Biden administration’s attempt to narrow targets for arrest and deportation to just immigrants seen as a threat to national security or public safety, a significant shift from the Trump administration's more sweeping approach, which directed Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to consider virtually anyone in the country illegally to be a priority.

More: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/Texas-challenge-to-Biden-deportation-priorities-17615927.php

Offline Elderberry

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 24,274
Re: Texas challenge to Biden deportation priorities goes to U.S. Supreme Court
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2022, 01:58:10 pm »
CASE PREVIEW

In U.S. v. Texas, broad questions over immigration enforcement and states’ ability to challenge federal policies

SCOTUSblog by Amy Howe 11/28/2022

https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/11/in-u-s-v-texas-broad-questions-over-immigration-enforcement-and-states-ability-to-challenge-federal-policies/

The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Tuesday in a dispute over the Biden administration’s authority to set immigration policy. Texas and Louisiana are challenging a federal policy that prioritizes certain groups of unauthorized immigrants for arrest and deportation, arguing that it violates federal law. But the Biden administration and its supporters counter that a ruling for the states would have sweeping implications – not only for immigration policy but also for states’ ability to sue the federal government when they disagree with its actions.

The policy at the heart of United States v. Texas is outlined in a September 2021 memorandum by Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas on the federal government’s priorities for immigration enforcement. Explaining that there are over 11 million noncitizens currently in the United States who could be subject to deportation, but that the Department of Homeland Security does not have the resources to apprehend and deport all of them, the memorandum instructed immigration officials to prioritize the apprehension and deportation of three groups of noncitizens: suspected terrorists, people who have committed crimes, and those caught recently at the border. Mayorkas’ memo resembles immigration-enforcement policies enacted under President Barack Obama and other prior administrations, though not Donald Trump, who sought to limit the role of discretion in immigration enforcement.

Texas and Louisiana went to federal court in Texas to challenge the Biden administration’s policy, arguing that federal law requires the government to detain and deport many more noncitizens than those identified by Mayorkas as high prioritizes. The federal government, the states argued, does not have the authority to prioritize some unauthorized immigrants for deportation while downplaying others. U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton agreed, and he vacated the policy nationwide in June. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit declined to put Tipton’s ruling on hold while the government appealed.

The Biden administration came to the Supreme Court in July, asking the justices to freeze Tipton’s order. By a vote of 5-4, the justices left Tipton’s order in place, but they also agreed to take up the challenge and hear oral argument without waiting for the court of appeals to weigh in.

The justices directed the Biden administration and the states to address three specific questions. The first is whether the states have a right to bring their lawsuit at all – a concept known as legal standing. The Biden administration maintains that they do not, stressing that states can sue the United States only if they are directly injured by the federal government. But Texas and Louisiana, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar writes, have argued only that the presence of additional noncitizens in their states may cost them more – for example, by requiring them to shoulder the costs of keeping noncitizens in prison or by providing them with public benefits. And courts have never recognized these kinds of indirect costs as creating a right to sue, the administration says. If this lawsuit is allowed to go forward, the administration warns, it will mean that any state could “sue the federal government about virtually any policy.”

More at link.