The Supreme Court on Friday upheld a key part of President Biden’s plan for targeted immigration enforcement, ruling the administration may focus its efforts on arresting and deporting those who pose a current danger.
In a 8-1 decision, the justices said Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to sue for the enforcement policy.
Writing for the court, Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh said “the states essentially want the federal judiciary to order the executive branch to alter its arrest policy so as to make more arrests. But this court has long held ‘that a citizen lacks standing to contest the policies of the prosecuting authority when he himself is neither prosecuted nor threatened with prosecution.’”
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented alone.
The decision in the case of U.S. vs. Texas does not involve the tens of thousands of migrants who arrive at the border or the millions of those who live in the country without legal documentation.
Instead, it concerns immigrants with past crimes on their records and whether the government is required to seek them out for arrest and deportation.
Republican state attorneys and the Democratic administration have been locked in a dispute over immigration enforcement. Last year, the Supreme Court by a 5-4 vote refused to allow Biden’s immigration enforcement guidelines to take effect, but the justices agreed to hear arguments on the legal dispute.
At issue is whether the law requires mandatory detention for immigrants who have a serious crime on their record or instead allows the administration to focus on arresting and deporting those who pose a current danger to public safety.
Often, immigrants serve years in state prisons for crimes such as drug trafficking. Upon release, they may be taken into custody by federal immigration agents, but that is not automatic.
Biden’s Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas said the government had no choice but to set priorities for enforcing the immigration laws.
“It is well-established in the law that federal government officials have broad discretion to decide who should be subject to arrest, detainers, removal proceedings and the execution of removal orders,” he said last September. He said enforcement should focus on “noncitizens who pose a current threat to public safety,” not all those who have a criminal record.
But Texas Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton filed a suit contending the law required the government to arrest, detain and deport what Congress called “criminal aliens,” including those who had an “aggravated felony” on their record.
He filed his suit before U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton, a Trump appointee in Corpus Christi, Texas. The judge issued a nationwide order declaring the administration’s enforcement policy was illegal and could not be used.
The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to lift the order in July of last year, and the Supreme Court did the same with its vote that month.
