Jarek Tuszyński / CC-BY-SA-3.0 & GDFL, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons, Cropped by Resist the Mainstream

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Texas on Tuesday, permitting the enforcement of a law that authorizes local police to detain migrants suspected of illegally crossing the border, representing a pivotal but provisional victory for Texas in its ongoing efforts to manage illegal immigration.

The Biden administration had previously sought to block this law, known as Senate Bill 4, arguing that it encroached on federal immigration enforcement authority.

This clash over state versus federal jurisdiction in immigration control echoes previous legal battles, notably the Supreme Court's 2012 decision concerning a similar Arizona law.

“The United States brings this action to preserve its exclusive authority under federal law to regulate the entry and removal of noncitizens,” the DOJ lawsuit, initiated in January, articulated. “Texas cannot run its own immigration system. Its efforts, through SB 4, intrude on the federal government’s exclusive authority to regulate the entry and removal of noncitizens, frustrate the United States’ immigration operations and proceedings, and interfere with U.S. foreign relations.”

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton celebrated the Supreme Court's decision, emphasizing the state's right to defend its sovereignty and enforce immigration law.

“Texas has defeated the Biden Administration’s and ACLU’s emergency motions at the Supreme Court. Our immigration law, SB 4, is now in effect. As always, it’s my honor to defend Texas and its sovereignty, and to lead us to victory in court,” Paxton stated.

The Supreme Court's decision focused not on the case's substance but on lifting the stay imposed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh, in a concurring opinion, underscored the appellate court's role in such matters, suggesting a possible different outcome when the case is reviewed in detail.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, criticizing the ruling for potentially causing further disruption in immigration enforcement.

“Texas passed a law that directly regulates the entry and removal of noncitizens and explicitly instructs its state courts to disregard any ongoing federal immigration proceedings. That law upends the federal state balance of power that has existed for over a century, in which the National Government has had exclusive authority over entry and removal of noncitizens,” Sotomayor wrote.