Federal judge appears skeptical of new Texas immigration law that makes illegal entry a state crime
Senate Bill 4 would empower state and local law enforcement to arrest suspected illegal immigrants and order them back across the border.
AUSTIN (Nexstar) — Texas' novel immigration enforcement law got its first legal test in federal court Thursday, challenged by the Department of Justice and civil rights groups who argue the law is "plainly unconstitutional and anti-immigrant."
Senate Bill 4 would empower state and local law enforcement to arrest suspected illegal immigrants and order them back across the border. The law creates a new state crime for crossing into Texas outside of a port of entry, punishable as a Class B misdemeanor. Repeat offenders could face a state jail felony, and state magistrate judges may order them to return to Mexico.
Arguments began Thursday morning in the U.S. Western District of Texas in downtown Austin. Cameras were not allowed and electronic device usage was prohibited inside.
The U.S. Department of Justice and civil rights groups sued the state in early January, arguing the law is “plainly unconstitutional and anti-immigrant.” The federal government is asking U.S. District Judge David Ezra to stop the law from going into effect and declare it unconstitutional.
U.S. attorneys argued in court that federal immigration law preempts state law.
"There's no ambiguity in federal law. States cannot have parallel laws for removing noncitizens," said Brian Boynton, the principal deputy U.S. assistant attorney general.
State lawyers said SB 4 is within its rights, noting that the penalties do not go any further than federal penalties for illegal entry.
Immigrant advocates and border residents held a rally outside the courthouse Thursday morning and went on to pack the courtroom to full capacity.
Judge Ezra questions state's arguments
While the judge said he sympathized with Texas' border challenges and affirmed the state is under pressure, he appeared skeptical of the state throughout its arguments, asking many questions throughout the hearing.
Ryan Walters — the lawyer who led the oral arguments for the Texas Office of Attorney General — reiterated the state's assertion that there is an "invasion" at the southern border, therefore giving Texas the authority to enforce immigration laws.
“I haven’t seen and the state of Texas can’t point me to any type of military invasion in Texas," Judge Ezra said. "I don't think anyone in their right mind would say federal immigration law doesn't need an update, but that doesn't mean it's not enforceable."
Walters said what makes SB 4 complimentary and not contradictory to federal law is that Texas officers would not expel migrants, but get an order for them to return to their home country. To which Ezra responded, "the point is they get sentenced."
Ezra also expressed concern about other states enacting similar immigration enforcement laws, if the Texas law were to be allowed to go into effect and upheld. He said it would create a patchwork of conflicting immigration laws in different states, speculating it could lead to the U.S. becoming “a confederation of states.”
Counsel on both sides asked the judge to rule as soon as possible. Ezra said he would carefully analyze the arguments and reach a decision with "plenty of time" before SB 4 is set to take effect on March 5, but said he has full expectations this case will end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
State senator says law is 'necessary'
Similar protests happened outside the Governor's Mansion on Wednesday.
"How is Texas going to protect us in light of these laws? I don't have trust, I don't have faith that this system will actually protect people," Marisa Limon Garza, the executive director of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, said. "How are you going to ensure that your law enforcement officers are going to have probable cause and will be able to make a determination about whether someone entered into Texas from Mexico at an official port of entry?"
Civil rights groups including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Texas Civil Rights Project argue the law will exacerbate racial profiling and could improperly detain legal residents. The bill's author dismisses those concerns.
"I just don't buy the premise that that's a systemic problem throughout our law enforcement community. It's just not true," State Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, said. "I'm not telling you that there's not going to be people that are inquired of their (immigration) status. But it's going to be premised upon some legitimate reason for stopping. They're not looking for reasons to stop people."
Perry argues the law is appropriate and necessary to protect Texans from an "invasion," citing the threats of drug cartels and human traffickers.
"We'll have to address what happens when the federal government does not do its job, according to the Constitution. And clearly, the constitution grants the state the ability to defend itself," he said.
This is a developing story, check back for updates. Capitol Correspondent Monica Madden will have a full report on the court hearing on KXAN at 5 p.m.