The Supreme Court of the United States and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a string of orders allowing the law to briefly go into effect before once more halting its application has caused the legal fight over Texas’s questionable SB 4 to be increasingly contentious in recent days.  ,
What do legitimate researchers anticipate will happen next and how did we get around?  ,
SB 4 Arguments ,
According to past updates, SB 4 makes unauthorized passage into the condition a crime under state laws, empowering Texas law enforcement to detain and get the de facto imprisonment of people suspected of crossing the border illegally.  ,
Texas has argued that SB 4 is a necessary response to the federal government’s immigration ban, arguing that it is in line with the state’s constitutional right to self-defense against “invasion.” The federal government and civil rights organizations have countered that SB 4 blatantly overturns the federal government’s long-standing authority to decide immigration law. They contend that the law creates confusion and goes against the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which declares federal law to be the supreme law of the land.  ,
” For us, the calculus is simple”, wrote the Texas AFL- CIO. Working people who cross the border to make a living, as well as citizens who are profiled and asked to show papers by law enforcement will be greatly harmed by SB 4. This law should never have taken effect, even for a few hours” . ,
” The law poses no barrier to questioning anyone anywhere in the state, regardless of how many police departments swear up and down it wo n’t work that way. A law enforcement official who is trying to win political points will soon react to Governor’s “invasion” rhetoric. Greg Abbott and test the limits of the law” . ,
” SB4 is the most dangerous, hateful and anti- immigrant law the United States has ever seen”, said the Workers Defense Action Fund. ” Migrants and the Latin community have historically been used as scapegoats in America’s political chess game, and this is hurting our communities” . ,
A Procedural Rollercoaster ,
Initially, a federal District Court Judge David A. Ezra issued a preliminary injunction on Thursday, February 29 blocking SB 4’s implementation based on concerns it conflicts with federal immigration laws and the U. S. Constitution, largely rejecting the state’s arguments. This decision was akin to the 2012 Arizona v. United States case, in which a 5-3 decision blocked an Arizona law instituting state-level immigration crimes. Legal experts believe SB 4 to be even more extreme than the Supreme Court’s preempted Arizona law.  ,
Texas, however, was n’t deterred. The state filed an appeal with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, asking for a temporary stay of Judge Ezra’s preliminary injunction, which would allow SB 4 to remain in effect as the appeal progressed. A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit granted a temporary “administrative stay,” allowing SB 4 to be put into effect until the appeals court could decide whether a longer stay was appropriate. The injunction’s merits are still undetermined.  ,
The plaintiffs in the case subsequently took action following this ruling. The Supreme Court received emergency requests from the federal government and immigration/civil rights organizations asking for SB 4 to be kept on hold while the litigation is ongoing. Justice Alito, acting as the” circuit justice” for the Fifth Circuit, initially issued two administrative stays, halting SB 4 before the Supreme Court could formally consider the emergency applications. Before the Supreme Court finally took action on Tuesday, March 19, these administrative stays were repeatedly extended.  ,
The Supreme Court Weighs In ,
The Supreme Court ultimately decided not to grant the emergency applications on March 19 and gave SB 4 a short run-in. However, a significant detail was revealed in Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion, which focused on a procedural issue, alongside Justice Barrett. They argued that the Court should n’t intervene in” true administrative stays” issued by appeals courts, which are meant to be temporary measures. Nevertheless, they said that the Fifth Circuit should be able to rule on Texas’s motion for a stay pending appeal “promptly”, and that,” If a decision does not issue soon, the applicants may return to this Court” . ,
The Plot Thickens: The Fifth Circuit Responds ,
This procedural reasoning appeared to nudge the Fifth Circuit. A separate three-judge panel quickly lifted the earlier panel’s temporary suspension of Judge Ezra’s injunction, once more preventing SB 4, and granted Texas ‘ motion for a stay while the appeal was pending on Wednesday morning via Zoom. This action suggests that the Fifth Circuit might not be willing to grant a longer stay, especially given the Barrett/Kavanaugh opinion.  ,
What Lies Ahead?  ,
On Wednesday, April 3, the Fifth Circuit will hear arguments on the merits of the preliminary injunction itself. However, the appeals court rules, and legal experts expect that this case will likely end up before the Supreme Court for a final decision on SB 4’s constitutionality.  ,
Local law enforcement organizations from Houston to Fort Worth have issued statements warning of the negative effects SB 4 would have on community policing and safety, while others in more traditional areas of Texas have said they will follow the law but face logistical and resource constraints that will make enforcement challenging. Mexico responded with a swift apology, branding SB 4 an anti-Christian violation of human rights and saying that the nation will not tolerate anyone who is removed by Texas under the law.  ,  ,
We urge all educators and school staff to carefully review the helpful information the Intercultural Development Research Association ( IDRA ) has collected about immigrant students ‘ rights. Stay tuned as Texas AFT will keep its members informed about this significant legal dispute over one of the most extreme anti-immigrant laws that any state legislature has ever passed.  ,
