Texas back in federal court over anti-'sanctuary cities' law
Court of Appeals, New Orleans
   
 
More Today's News:
ߦ   Reader Survey
ߦ   Applications Being Accepted For Entry Level Police Officer - City of Santa Fe
ߦ   43 States Suspend Licenses for Unpaid Court Debt, But That Could Change
ߦ   Constables Need your help finding Violent Robbery Suspect
ߦ   Dallas Man Sentenced to 210 Months in Federal Prison for Possessing Child Pornography
ߦ   Denaturalization Sought Against Five Child Sexual Abusers in Florida, Illinois, and Texas
ߦ   Feds Plan Nationwide Operation Targeting Food Service Chain Over Undocumented Workers
ߦ   FEMA Registsration Deadline for Galveston County
ߦ   Former Postal Employee Federally Charged in Case Related to Death of Co-Worker
ߦ   Grand Jury Indicts Dallas Man Who Fired Multiple Shots at a Vehicle on Firearm and Drug Charges
ߦ   Katy Securities Agent Fined for Disclosure Failures
ߦ   Leadership Lessons From Psychopaths
ߦ   Local Man Heads to Prison on Multiple Drug and Firearms Charges
ߦ   Lufkin Police Dept - Daily Media Report
ߦ   Man Found Passed Out In Car Convicted Of DWI
ߦ   Man Pays Price for Trafficking Box Turtles to Corpus Christi
ߦ   Officers Convicted of Using Excessive Force Against Arrestee and Obstruction of Justice
ߦ   Sheriff’s Office Arrest Fourth Suspect for Felony Injury to a Child, Case Still Active
ߦ   Sugar Land Man Pleads Guilty In Child Porn Case
ߦ   End Cruelty Now
ߦ   Alvin Police Dept - Week Offenses/Arrests Bulletin
ߦ   Brooklyn College Reportedly 'Preferring' That NYPD Use Bathrooms Away From Student Areas
ߦ   Burnet County Sheriff's Office - Inmate/Arrests Summary
ߦ   Chalk Hill Road Homicide Investigation – Arrest Made
ߦ   Chief's Weekly Executive Summary
ߦ   Dallas Man Sentenced For His Role in November 2015 Armed Assault on Federal Officers
ߦ   Death Investigation - UPDATE
ߦ   Duncanville Man Sentenced for Receipt and Possession of Child Pornography
ߦ   Editorial: Outpouring of HPD support by Houstonians Continues to be more obvious than ever before
ߦ   Fatal Crash at 18600 Kenswick Drive
ߦ   Fatal Shooting at 6345 Windswept Lane
ߦ   Galveston County DA Announces 19th Annual 'Tree of Angels' Ceremony
ߦ   Help Solve This Homicide
ߦ   Investigation into Fatal Crash at 5600 Airline Drive
ߦ   Investigation into Fatal Shooting at 1007 Glen Avenue

   Next >>
 
Search Archives:
Attorneys for the state of Texas are set to head back before the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans on Tuesday to defend the state’s new immigration enforcement law, Senate Bill 4, against charges that the measure is discriminatory and violates the U.S. Constitution.But the Texas attorney general’s office enters the courtroom with some wind at its back after a three-judge panel of the court allowed parts of the controversial law to go into effect in late September.

Gov. Greg Abbott signed SB 4 into law in May, but several local governments, including the cities of Houston, Austin, San Antonio and El Cenizo, as well as Maverick and El Paso counties, filed suit to block the measure from going into effect.

As passed, SB 4 allows local law enforcement officers to question the immigration status of people they detain or arrest and punishes local government department heads and elected officials who don’t cooperate with federal immigration "detainers" — requests by agents to turn over immigrants subject to possible deportation — in the form of jail time and penalties that exceed $25,000.

U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia in late August halted several parts of the bill, including the provision that requires jail officials to honor all detainers. He also blocked other sections that prohibit local entities from pursuing “a pattern or practice that 'materially limits' the enforcement of immigration laws” and another that prohibits “assisting or cooperating” with federal immigration officers as reasonable or necessary. He did not block the part of the bill that says police chiefs, sheriffs and other department heads cannot forbid officers from questioning a person’s immigration status.

The state of Texas countered after Garcia’s ruling and asked a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit to lift Garcia’s ruling while the case played out. The panel ruled the detainer provision could stand but the part that requires local jails to “comply with, honor and fulfill” detainers does not require detention based on every detainer issued. The panel also determined that law enforcement officers, including campus police, with “authority that may impact immigration” cannot be prevented from assisting federal immigration officers. 

Attorneys will argue on Tuesday on whether Garcia’s initial injunction should be in effect until he rules on the substance of SB 4 in its entirety.

Nina Perales, vice president of litigation for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which is representing several of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, said among the issues is whether SB 4 violates the First Amendment.

Opponents say the law's language prohibits law enforcement officers from speaking out against SB 4 or crafting policies that don’t focus on immigration enforcement. They also claim the law violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which states that immigration laws are a federal — not a state — responsibility.

Perales said issues related to the Fourth Amendment — prohibiting illegal search and seizure — could also arise because the previous panel allowed the bulk of the detainer provision to stand. At issue, she said, is “whether SB 4’s mandatory detainer provision could force counties — primarily [the government entities] with jails — to violate a person’s Fourth Amendment rights.”

During a conference call with reporters last week, MALDEF president and general counsel Thomas Saenz said there’s no way to predict when a ruling will be made after Tuesday’s arguments.

“They can take as long as they would like. In the meantime, Judge Garcia’s injunction, as modified by the [three-judge panel’s ruling], will remain the law until this panel makes its decision,” he said.

But the 5th Circuit’s eventual ruling might not be the last word, Saenz added, because either side could petition the U.S. Supreme Court to make the final determination on whether Texas can craft its own immigration-enforcement provisions and how far-reaching they can be.

A spokesperson in Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office did not respond to an email seeking comment about Tuesday’s proceedings.

Tuesday’s debate will be the latest in what’s been a year-long battle over the legislation. Filed in November 2016 and deemed an “emergency item” by Abbott, the legislation was the subject of marathon public testimony in Senate and House committee hearings, where witnesses were overwhelmingly against the measure. 

After the bill was signed, protesters took to the State Capitol on the last day of the regular legislative session and disrupted proceedings in the House to the extent that the lower chamber was forced to recess until the Department of Public Safety cleared the gallery.

Post a comment
Name/Nickname:
(required)
Email Address: (must be a valid address)
(will not be published or shared)
Comments: (plain text only)
Printer Friendly Format  Printer Friendly Format    Send to a Friend  Send to a Friend    RSS Feed  RSS Feed
  Facebook   Share link on Twitter Tweet   Shared 2 times
© 1999-2017 The Police News. All rights reserved.