A federal judge who already struck down a Texas immigration law once before has temporarily blocked key provisions of the same bill on the grounds it oversteps national immigration enforcement authority.
Texas lawmakers passed the controversial legislation in 2023 during the height of President Joe Biden’s border crisis, but it faced legal challenges almost immediately.
Reagan-appointed U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra struck down parts of Texas’ Senate Bill 4 on Thursday, May 14, a day before it was set to take effect in Texas, ruling that immigration enforcement is primarily the responsibility of the federal government.
The preliminary injunction blocks Texas judges from ordering the removal of illegal migrants from the country while the legal challenge continues in federal court. Ezra’s decision also applies to a provision regarding illegal reentry and limits the state’s key enforcement efforts, KHOU 11 News reported.
Federal district judges across the country have spent the last year allegedly trying to overstep their authority with blanket rulings in an effort to thwart President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown despite laws passed by Congress.
As passed, SB 4 was designed to allow state and local police to arrest suspected illegal immigrants and give magistrates the authority “to issue deportation orders” independent of the federal government.
The temporary ruling halts four key provisions of SB 4, pending ongoing legal challenges.
Some parts of the law, including the ability for police to arrest anyone suspected of unlawful entry, were not blocked by Ezra’s ruling, Courthouse News Service reported. The preliminary injunction applies to a provision that makes reentry a crime for “anyone living in or traveling through Texas who reentered the United States.”
However, in his 78-page order, Ezra said the power to create and enforce national immigration policy falls to Congress and the federal government. His order aligns with an earlier ruling that challenged SB 4 on the same constitutional grounds.
In his ruling, Ezra wrote the provisions of SB 4 challenged by the class-action lawsuit likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause. The law encroaches on the federal government’s authority to regulate immigration, he ruled.
It’s a similar argument used in other immigration court cases, such as when Trump called up National Guard troops to support immigration enforcement, but this time it’s being used to block a state from kicking out illegal immigrants.
“SB 4 threatens the fundamental notion that the United States must regulate immigration with one voice,” Ezra wrote, seemingly oblivious to activists’ judges attempts to undermine the Trump administration’s efforts to enforce federal immigration law.
SB 4 would have made it a state crime to break immigration laws and illegally enter into Texas. Once prosecuted, judges would be required to order migrants to be removed from the U.S.
Texas officials had argued that the massive migrant surge constituted an invasion, and the state had the right to detain and deport illegal immigrants since the federal government wasn’t enforcing the law under Biden.
Ezra rejected Texas’ argument that the migrant surge constitutes an “invasion,” which would trigger state powers to repel the invaders.
Per the judge, Senate Bill 4 interferes with that by giving state and local law enforcement the authority to detain and deport illegal immigrants even when the feds don’t approve, The Washington Times reported.
The judge cited two anonymous Honduran immigrants leading a class-action lawsuit and said they had met their burden to show “they face a substantial threat of enforcement” under SB 4’s reentry provision.
Both plaintiffs, who live in Austin, are the primary providers in their families. One is a green card holder, while the other has received provisional approval for a U-visa, Courthouse News Service reported.
Texas adopted the law as millions of migrants flooded into the state with no help or border enforcement from the federal government.
As the border descended into chaos, the state could not handle the influx of new arrivals. The migrants cut through fencing and disregarded warnings to turn back.
Some escaped detection by U.S. Border Patrol, but the vast majority were part of lenient catch-and-release policies authorized by Biden’s Department of Homeland Security.
“The Biden administration, which was derelict in its constitutional duty to secure the border, initiated the lawsuit against Texas, showing its hand on the willful nature of the border surge,” opined editors from The Patriot Post.
Critics argue Judge Ezra is an ideological idiot who is pushing an agenda. Ezra didn’t see Biden’s border failures as a dereliction of duty and instead determined Texas didn’t have the right to meddle in immigration enforcement.
The judge ruled the state-level law essentially violates Congress’ rights. SB 4 runs counter to federal law “because it provides state officials the power to enforce federal law without federal supervision.”
In addition, deportation goes to the heart of core federal powers, including foreign policy decisions, and the Texas law sets a precedent for other states to follow.
“If allowed to proceed, SB 4 could open the door to each state passing its own version of immigration laws,” the judge wrote. “The effect would moot the uniform regulation of immigration throughout the country and force the federal government to navigate a patchwork of inconsistent regulations.”
Under President Donald Trump, the border has been virtually sealed and the reckless catch-and-release policies have ended, proving the Biden administration willfully facilitated the invasion.
The Biden administration initially sued to block the Texas law but was joined by immigrant rights groups who said it was unconstitutional and would lead to racial profiling.
In a statement released Thursday, the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas said the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas granted a motion for a preliminary injunction.
The ACLU of Texas, the ACLU, and the Texas Civil Rights Project filed the class-action lawsuit on May 4, according to the release and local news reports.
“The court’s decision reaffirms what every court that has reviewed the merits of S.B. 4 and laws like it has held: Immigration enforcement is exclusively a federal issue and not up to the states,” the groups said in a joint statement on the ruling. “S.B. 4 would instill fear in our communities, cause widespread racial profiling, and subject lawfully present immigrants to arrest, detention, and deportation. Texas cannot override the U.S. Constitution and should stop wasting time attempting to do so.”
The groups said Ezra’s injunction blocks these provisions:
- A reentry crime that would apply to anyone living in or traveling through Texas who reentered the United States, “even if the person had federal permission to reenter or has since obtained lawful immigration status, such as a green card.”
- Authority for magistrates “to issue deportation orders.”
- A crime of failing to comply with a magistrate’s removal orders.
- A requirement that magistrates continue a prosecution even when a person has a pending immigration case under federal law.
After President Donald Trump was reelected, the Department of Justice filed a brief largely backing Texas in the case.
Judge Ezra’s latest ruling is the second time he has ruled against SB 4. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Texas, shot down another challenge to SB 4 late last month.
Shortly after the law was passed, immigration advocacy organizations, El Paso County and the Biden administration challenged it on the same constitutional grounds raised by the migrants in the present case.
Ezra granted the groups’ request to block the law from taking effect and a Fifth Circuit panel affirmed. However, in April, the full appeals court reviewed the case and found the plaintiffs lacked standing, giving SB 4 the green light to take effect on May 15, Courthouse News Service reported.
