When Texas Dressed Up Discrimination Against Brown People As… A Non-Existent Public Health Concern.

Or. . .”In Which Texas Tries To Make Driving While Brown. . . Officially Unlawful. . . It Will Fail.”

Gov. Abbott (and TX AG Paxson) apparently have decided that they need racism. . . to guide all Texas troopers — in stop and frisk operations — by motor vehicle. This insults all good officers, there. And just one (other) problem: Texas lacks that authority, under our Constitution (even if it can meet the exceedingly high burden of proving that the stops are NOT mere pretexts for invidious discrimination). And these are pretextual, to a certainty. But the law of the land grants exclusive jurisdiction on immigration matters to the federal government — so, Texas lacks even an arguable basis to stop, where it claims immigration status is “driving” the stop.

This Abbott executive order is manifestly lawless, and unenforceable. It will be enjoined. Even in the trial courts, in Texas — where it is now. Stay tuned, but here is the DoJ’s suit against Texas, tonight — and a bit:

. . .The Constitution affords Congress the power to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” U.S. Const., art. I § 8, cl. 4. It also affords the President of the United States the authority to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” U.S. Const., art. II § 3. Congress has exercised its authority over immigration to make laws governing the entry, admission, presence, status, and removal of noncitizens within the United States by enacting the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq., and other laws regulating immigration. These laws codify the Executive Branch’s authority to inspect, investigate, arrest, detain, and remove noncitizens who are suspected of being, or found to be, unlawfully in the United States. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1231, 1357. Federal law also creates criminal sanctions for those who facilitate the unlawful entry, residence, or transportation of noncitizens within the United States. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1323, 1324, 1327, 1328. The States and their political subdivisions cannot obstruct or discriminate against the execution of federal immigration laws. See Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387, 394-95 (2012). . . .

Federal law also explicitly recognizes the authority of the United States to “arrange for appropriate places of detention for aliens detained pending removal or a decision on removal[.]” 8 U.S.C. § 1231(g)(1); accord 8 U.S.C. § 1103(a)(11). The INA further vests the United States with broad discretion to release noncitizens seeking admission to the United States from custody through various mechanisms including, inter alia, parole under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(d)(5) and conditional release from custody under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a)(2)(B). See also 8 U.S.C. § 1229c (authorizing the federal government to release removable noncitizens for as long as 120 days, in exchange for the non-citizen’s commitment to depart voluntarily). Noncitizens subject to removal proceedings are provided a written Notice to Appear. 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a)(1)(G)(i). That Notice to Appear must be filed with the Executive Office for Immigration Review and provide “[t]he time and place at which the proceedings will be held.” 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a)(1)(G)(i). Noncitizens may also be subject to a process known as expedited removal. 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1). . . .

“. . .[S]tates have no power. . . to retard, impede, burden, or in any manner control the operations of the constitutional laws enacted by [C]ongress to carry into effect the powers vested in the national government.” M’Culloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, 317 (1819). . . .

[Remedies; Prayer for Relief:] A declaratory judgment stating that the executive order violates the Supremacy Clause and the doctrine of intergovernmental immunity, and therefore is invalid, null, and void [and]

Preliminary and permanent injunctions against the State of Texas, and its officers, agents and employees, from enforcing the executive order. . . [among other things.]

It seems that Abbott wants to “Out-Costello” the old Tangerine. We will be happy to meet him in court, and disabuse him of his hateful, lawless overreach — as well those of his ever-slimy AG, Paxson. Onward — but still smiling — I just cannot. . . help myself. Heh.


There are no comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: