Staff Reports
In an eyebrow-raising turn, the Biden administration has opted for a legal tango with Texas over its improvised barrier, citing obstruction in agents' ability to nab border crossers. Their move: a lightning-fast plea to the Supreme Court, gunning to overturn a federal appeals court decision curbing federal meddling in sections of razor wire fencing Texas erected along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Bad Comedy: Biden Admin Sues, Says Texas Razor Wire Keeps Feds From Arresting Illegals
READ: https://t.co/uf1giX429R
— Constitutionalist ? ?? (@Kc_Casey1) January 3, 2024
This peculiar fence, stretching about 110 miles, boasts Texas craftsmanship, woven with concertina wire on state and private lands bordering the Rio Grande. Texas champions it as a deterrent against illegal crossings. Initially, the Biden administration sued Texas, scoring an injunction that allowed Border Patrol agents to snip the wire. But the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals flipped the script, ruling the fencing as state property, off-limits to federal interference, except in medical emergencies.
Now, Homeland Security under Biden seeks the Supreme Court’s arbitration. They argue that the appeals court’s decision encroaches upon federal immigration jurisdiction, citing laws granting Border Patrol agents access to private borderland sans warrant and empowering them to ‘interrogate,’ ‘arrest,’ and detain violators pending removal decisions.
Yet, the southern border grapples with an overwhelming surge. December alone witnessed over 300,000 entries, many being single adult males. Amid Texas navigating this deluge, the Biden administration’s approach to aiding officers in apprehending noncitizens is to instruct them to dismantle the meager deterrence. It’d be laughable if the stakes weren’t so dire.
In essence, the Biden administration’s legal tiff with Texas over the fence dances on the irony line. While they preach a commitment to border security, their actions undermining a state’s deterrent efforts echo a flawed approach to the border crisis. It’s akin to the kid who claims he’d eat fewer cookies if the jar were wide open—a convoluted reasoning. Prioritizing noncitizens' rights over American citizens' safety doesn’t paint a reassuring picture.
