A federal judge in Austin, Texas, has blocked the implementation of a controversial immigration law that would have allowed state officials to arrest, jail, and prosecute migrants who cross into the U.S. illegally. The law, known as SB4, was set to take effect on March 5 but has been temporarily halted due to constitutional concerns.
The Justice Department and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) challenged the law, arguing that states cannot enforce immigration measures without federal approval. In a 114-page order, Judge David Ezra of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas granted the challengers’ request for a preliminary injunction, preventing Texas officials from enforcing the state law.
Judge Ezra emphasized that the Texas law conflicts with federal law and stated that allowing Texas to enforce it would mean states could override federal statutes—a constitutional theory known as nullification, which has been rejected by federal courts since the Civil War. He wrote, “[T]o allow Texas to permanently supersede federal directives on the basis of an invasion would amount to nullification of federal law and authority—a notion that is antithetical to the Constitution.”
Texas Governor Greg Abbott expressed his disappointment with the ruling and vowed to appeal, stating that the case will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The appeal will be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, which has the power to pause the district judge’s decision while it reviews the case. Ultimately, either party could request that the Supreme Court review the appeals court’s action.
SB4 would have criminalized crossing into Texas unlawfully at the state level, in addition to being illegal under federal law. The law would have empowered state law enforcement officials to stop and detain anyone suspected of entering Texas unlawfully, as well as allowed state judges to issue de facto deportation orders. It also included provisions that prohibited state officials from arresting migrants in certain locations, such as schools and health care facilities.
Critics of the law argue that it could lead to racial profiling and overwhelm county jails and public safety resources. They also believe that it interferes with federal immigration enforcement. Supporters, including Governor Abbott, argue that the law is necessary to deter illegal border crossings, as the number of apprehensions by U.S. Border Patrol agents along the southern border reached record levels in recent years.
The ruling by Judge Ezra has temporarily halted the implementation of SB4, but the legal battle is far from over. The case will likely make its way through the appellate courts and may eventually be decided by the Supreme Court. In the meantime, the debate over immigration enforcement and state versus federal authority continues to be a contentious issue in the United States.
