In a healthy breath of oxygen to the immigration debate, the Supreme Court temporarily stopped the implementation of the controversial Texas SB4 law.
This ruling took place one day before the controversial legislation came into effect, which authorizes Texas State agents and police to detain and expeditiously deport to Mexico immigrants who have illegally crossed the border from Mexico. It would have been the perfect formula for racial discrimination.
SB4 also forces judges to order immediate repatriations and establishes new crimes, including a sentence of up to 20 years in prison for undocumented immigrants who are accused of repeating an undocumented entry. It seems that Donald Trump’s dreams come true in Texas.
The Department of Justice requested the intervention of the Supreme Court after Governor Gregg Abbott challenged the federal government’s threat to stop the implementation of the SB4 law, considered by the Biden administration as unconstitutional and harmful to the foreign relations of the United States.
This was the second lawsuit against SB4. In December, a group of organizations represented by the National Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Texas filed a lawsuit accusing the legislation of violating the rights of asylum seekers.
Protected under the philosophy of “self-defense” against the alleged “invasion” of undocumented immigrants, Texas not only implemented the legislation, but has blocked the access of Border Patrol agents to a portion of the border with Mexico, to prevent them from providing support to immigrants.
But even if courts ultimately recognize the power of states to enact laws they deem necessary to protect their borders and maintain public safety, it must be clear that those laws do not violate the Constitution or the rights of the people, including immigrant rights.
The pause comes at a time when migration has become the main issue in the final stretch of the November presidential elections.
Last week, President Joe Biden invited Donald Trump to work together for a comprehensive immigration solution. Trump’s response was to demand that Biden close the national borders of the United States, with Mexico and Canada, immediately.
The positioning of the two main presidential candidates suggests that there is no bridge to bring the positions closer at this time. Worse still, the Biden administration has released reports that it could even consider, by executive action, new restrictions on asylum.
Hopefully the courts will do with SB4 the same thing they did with Arizona’s SB1070 more than 10 years ago: bury it in the pantheon of unconstitutional laws.
But it is neither moral nor ethical for the most vulnerable among us, migrants and asylum seekers, to be the cannon fodder, the scapegoats, in the battle for control of the White House and Congress.
