Border Invasion Validation

[Elderberry]

Lawrence Person's BattleSwarm Blog 8/2/2024

Texas’ theory that the state is undergoing an illegal alien invasion, as per Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the Constitution of the United States of America, due to the Biden Administrations willfully ignoring border control laws, just got some validation from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit permitted the State of Texas’ buoy barrier in the Rio Grande to remain in an en banc ruling Tuesday night, but an ancillary opinion from Judge James Ho endorses one of Gov. Greg Abbott’s main border contentions: that the state is being “invaded” by illegal immigrants.

    Overall, the court’s ruling was more procedural than substantive on the case’s full scope — that the U.S. government’s argument that the 1,000-foot stretch of water constitutes a “navigable water” under federal law is “unlikely to succeed” on its merits.

    But Ho’s part-concurrence, part-dissent opinion takes a different route, fully endorsing the State of Texas’ invocation of the much-debated “invasion clause.”

    Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution reads: “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.”

    After shrugging off, then toying with the suggestion that an invasion be declared to expand Texas’ border enforcement capabilities, Abbott gave it his full-throated backing in January.

    “President Biden has instructed his agencies to ignore federal statutes that mandate the detention of illegal immigrants. The failure of the Biden Administration to fulfill the duties imposed by Article IV, § 4 has triggered Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which reserves to this State the right of self-defense,” he stated.

    Dozens of counties in Texas had already invoked the invasion clause, currently at least 55.

    It then became one of the central contentions in the state’s legal strategy related to border security and illegal immigration.

    The case for such a declaration has been made slowly over the last couple of years, including by such center-right political figures as Ken Cuccinelli, a former deputy secretary of the Department of Homeland Security under President Donald Trump, and his new employer the Center for Renewing America.

More: https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=59375

[Elderberry]

The founders crafted the constitution not just to balance the power of the three branches of government, but also to balance the power of the federal government with the states (which they intended to have more power than the federal government), and the power of individuals to oppose the state, and thus by distribution of power to different entities thwart tyranny. But I suspect even at their most cynical, the founders would never imagine that a political party would deliberately engineer the invasion of America by millions of foreigners merely for political gain…

[Elderberry]

Texas gets win from full appeals court in dispute with DOJ over buoys in Rio Grande

By Tierney Sneed, CNN 7/30/2024

 The full 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals handed Texas a major win Tuesday in its ongoing legal dispute with the Biden administration over the state’s construction of a floating barrier in the Rio Grande.

In a split ruling, the very conservative appeals court wiped away a judge’s preliminary ruling – put on pause in January by the full 5th Circuit – that had directed Texas to remove the barriers.

Circuit Judge Don Willett, writing for the majority of the New Orleans-based court, said the relevant federal law likely did not apply to the stretch of the river where Texas had placed the buoys. He also concluded that the Justice Department had “offered no evidence that the barrier threatens safety,” and rejected the department’s arguments that the lower court order was necessary to alleviate diplomatic tensions with Mexico.

Seven judges signed on to dissents. Circuit Judge James Ho, known for his especially strident opinions, wrote a partial dissent that said Texas should prevail for a different reason: Its move to erect the buoys is a “strategic military decision” by the state to “repel” a foreign “invasion,” making the case a political dispute that courts lack the authority to weigh in on.

It is not clear if the Justice Department – which did not seek the Supreme Court’s intervention when the 5th Circuit allowed Texas to keep the barriers in place earlier this year – will now appeal the new ruling to the high court. Spokespeople for the department did not respond to CNN’s inquiry.

Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott celebrated the ruling on X with a post, saying, “Texas can KEEP these buoys in the water securing our border.”

More: https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/30/politics/texas-rio-grande-buoys-5th-circuit-decision/index.html

[Free Vulcan]

A number of us here have strongly stated that the FedGov cannot abdicate it's lawful responsibilities then turn around and prevent the States from taking up the same.