SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
border patrol
Supreme Court Rules 5-4 Against Texas in Razor Wire Border Battle
"The fact that four votes went in Texas' favor is a worrying sign," said one advocate.
Jan 22, 2024
Immigrant rights advocates and legal experts on Monday applauded as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Texas officials cannot impede federal border agents from cutting down razor wire that Republican Gov. Greg Abbott installed near the Rio Grande to stop migrants and asylum-seekers from crossing the U.S.-Mexico border—but expressed shock that four justices opposed the decision.
The high court voted 5-4 in favor of the Biden administration, which had previously been ordered by a federal appeals court last month to stop removing razor wire.
Right-wing Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito dissented, while Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the court's three liberals in voting to allow border agents to cut down the wire.
Texas argued last month that under the Biden administration's orders, border agents had damaged state property and illegally trespassed when they cut through the concertina wire in order to reach migrants who had crossed onto U.S. soil and take them into custody for processing.
The U.S. Justice Department filed an emergency request asking the Supreme Court to reverse the federal appeals court's ruling.
In the Biden administration's filing, officials noted that three migrants—a woman and two children—drowned just over a week ago while trying to cross the Rio Grande.
The drownings, wrote U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, "underscore that Texas is firm in its continued efforts to exercise complete control of the border and land... and to block Border Patrol’s access to the border even in emergency circumstances."
"It is impossible to say what might have happened if Border Patrol had had its former access to the area—including through its surveillance trucks that assisted in monitoring the area," wrote Prelogar. "At the very least, however, Border Patrol would have had the opportunity to take any available steps to fulfill its responsibilities and assist its counterparts in the Mexican government with undertaking the rescue mission. Texas made that impossible."
The administration said the appeals court's ruling turned the U.S. Constitution's supremacy clause "on its head." The clause states that federal laws take precedence over statutes put in place by state governments.
"If that injunction is left in place," Prelogar said, "it will impede Border Patrol agents from carrying out their responsibilities to enforce the immigration laws and guard against the risk of injury and death, matters for which the federal government, not Texas, is held politically accountable."
Journalist Peter Sterne was among those who expressed concern over the four conservative justices' apparent disagreement with the supremacy clause.
"Whatever one thinks of current immigration policy, it ought not to be that controversial that states cannot prevent the federal government from enforcing federal law—lest we set the stage for Democratic-led states to similarly attempt to frustrate the enforcement of federal policies by Republican presidents," said University of Texas School of Law professor and CNN Supreme Court analyst Steve Vladeck. "That four justices would still have left the lower court injunction in place will be taken, rightly or wrongly, as a sign that some of those long-standing principles of constitutional federalism might be in a degree of flux."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy director of the American Immigration Council, said that considering well-established constitutional law, it was "not a surprise that the Supreme Court ruled in the Biden administration's favor here.
"That said," he added, "the fact that four votes went in Texas' favor is a worrying sign."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Drowning of Women, Two Children Intensify Disgust Over Illegal Border Operations by Texas National Guard
"Gov. Abbott's inhumanity has no limit. Everyone who enables his cruelty has blood on their hands."
Jan 14, 2024
The drowning of a woman and two young children along the U.S.-Mexico border have sparked outrage and rebuke over the weekend after it was reported that U.S. Border Patrol agents attempting a rescue operation were denied access to the area by Texas security officials operating under the direction of Republican Gov. Greg Abbott.
According toTexas Public Radio:
On Friday night, Border Patrol agents nearby learned from Mexican officials that a group of migrants were in distress.
They tried to call the Texas Department of Public Safety and Texas National Guard unsuccessfully and then drove over to Shelby Park, according to Congressman Henry Cuellar (D-Laredo), who was briefed on the matter.
"Border Patrol agents then made physical contact with the Texas Military Department and the Texas National Guard at the Shelby Park Entrance Gate and verbally relayed the information," Cuellar said. "However, Texas Military Department soldiers stated they would not grant access to the migrants—even in the event of an emergency —and that they would send a soldier to investigate the situation."
The bodies of the migrant woman and two children were eventually recovered by Mexican authorities.
In his statement, Cuellar called the events a "tragedy" and that the state of Texas "bears responsibility."
White House spokesperson Angelo Fernández Hernández confirmed that Texas soldiers "blocked U.S. Border Patrol from attempting to provide emergency assistance" to the migrants in distress.
"While we continue to gather facts about the circumstances of these tragic deaths," Fernández Hernández added, "one thing is clear: Governor Abbott's political stunts are cruel, inhumane, and dangerous."
The drownings on Friday night came just hours after the U.S. Department of Justice petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene against Texas for taking effective control over Shelby Park and approximately 2.5 miles of border as part of what Gov. Abbott has dubbed "Operation Lone Star." A challenge to the law was previously considered by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals which stayed action by the federal government pending further review.
"This moment could be a flashpoint in the situation at the border," said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy director for the American Immigration Council, said Saturday in response to the drownings.
"The Supreme Court is poised to weigh in on the 5th Circuit’s decision any moment," he added. "And now it seems that three people have already died as a result of the Fifth Circuit's order and Abbott's escalation."
Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texa) placed the blame for Friday's loss of life squarely on Abbott and other officials in the state who support the policy.
"This is what Operation Lone Star looks like on the ground," said Castro. "Texas officials blocked Border Patrol agents from doing their job and allowed two children to drown in the Rio Grande. Governor Abbott's inhumanity has no limit. Everyone who enables his cruelty has blood on their hands."
On Saturday, footage emerged of Texas National Guard troops deploying razor wire and riot shields to stop migrants and asylum-seekers from crossing the border near Eagle Pass.
"Texas has no legal authority to patrol the border and its National Guard isn't trained to do so. It shows," said Tom Jawetz, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress who previously served as deputy general counsel for the Department of Homeland Security, in response to the footage.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on Friday filed suit against Gov. Abbott and Texas over the state's S.B. 4 that seeks to permit local and state law enforcement to arrest and detain people they suspect to have entered the state from another country without federal authorization.
As the federal government, not individual states, are responsible for enforcing immigration policies and border security in the U.S., the ACLU has warned that S.B. 4 is not only harmful to migrants and those seeking asylum but also unlawful.
"This law will rupture Texas communities," said Adriana Piñon, legal director at the ACLU of Texas, in a statement on Friday. "It will strip people of their rights under federal law with devastating consequences: Families may be separated, more people may live in fear of law enforcement, and migrants may have a harder time fully integrating into our communities. This plainly unconstitutional law should never have been passed, so now we are seeking to stop its enforcement while the litigation unfolds.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Border Patrol Reveals 'Culture of Impunity' as Agents Cleared in Dozens of Killings
Border Patrol internal affairs department absolves agents in 67 lethal force cases
Jun 15, 2015
In case after case involving U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shooting and killing unarmed people, agents were cleared of wrongdoing by the CBP's internal affairs department--including in the killings of children and U.S. citizens.
Investigations into 67 shooting incidents, 19 of which were fatal, absolved agents in all but three cases, which are still pending, the LA Timesreported on Monday. Only two agents in total were disciplined--with an oral reprimand, the Times wrote.
Even in cases where evidence of criminal misconduct was presented, agents still went free of charges.
One case was that of a 15-year-old Mexican boy who was shot and killed by border patrol after throwing rocks from a border bridge in El Paso, Texas in 2010.
In another, agents shot to death a 19-year-old American citizen as he attempted to climb a fence into Mexico near Douglas, Arizona.
All agents were cleared of wrongdoing in those cases. Meanwhile, the agents involved in the three shooting incidents currently awaiting investigation are still conducting armed patrols along the border.
Critics say the findings demonstrate how the CBP, like many federal agencies, operates with near-impunity, even as the Obama administration has promised to crack down on the use of excessive force.
"We are deeply disappointed" with the lack of action, Juanita Molina, executive director of Border Action Network, a human rights organization based in Tucson, told the Times. "When you have someone throwing rocks and someone responding with lethal force, it is just not proportional."
"Turning the page doesn't mean burying the past," said Chris Rickerd, a border security expert at the ACLU. "There is no assurance to border residents that agents who have used excessive, improper lethal force aren't on the job in their communities."
The Times continued:
Unlike domestic police departments, the 21,000-member Border Patrol released almost no public information about shootings, including the outcome of its investigations, until recently. That practice has started to ease slightly as supervisors have been granted more latitude from headquarters to describe individual incidents.
The internal affairs review was started in July after an earlier study of the same 67 shooting cases by an independent group of law enforcement experts found a pattern of agents firing in frustration at people throwing rocks from across the border, as well as agents deliberately stepping in front of cars apparently to justify shooting at the drivers.
The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), which conducted the independent review in May 2014, said the border patrol showed "a lack of diligence" in investigating shooting incidents.
Christian Ramirez, director of the Southern Border Communities Coalition, said at the time that the PERF report should mark "a turning point for the strained relations between Customs and Border Protection and civil society."
In an op-ed for the El Paso Times, the Arizona Republic editorial board excoriated the agency for its culture of secrecy, racial profiling, and human rights abuses at detention centers.
"The Border Patrol is alleged to have committed egregious civil rights abuses. Many people think that doesn't matter because agents deal with people who crossed the border illegally," wrote the editorial board. "But U.S. citizens are waiting for answers about checkpoints in their communities. U.S. citizen children have allegedly been detained in inhuman conditions. U.S. citizens have been killed by border agents. And the U.S. Constitution does not protect only U.S. citizens. The Border Patrol culture of impunity needs to change. The evidence just keeps piling up."
In one of the three cases still awaiting investigation, border patrol agents shot 30-year-old Juan Pablo Perez Santillan as he stood watch for a group of migrants crossing the Rio Grande near Brownsville, Texas in July 2012. Perez Santillan died from his wounds at a hospital.
According to a lawsuit filed by Perez Santillan's family, an agent shot at the man five times, hitting him in the chest. As Perez Santillan's brother Damien pleaded for help, the lawsuit states, another agent shouted back, "Que se muera el perro."
"Let the dog die."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular