CNS News–The current standoff between Texas and federal authorities at the U.S.-Mexico border, particularly in the context of Border Patrol operations, has raised critical concerns about the role of the Supreme Court in this escalating conflict. Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s directives, which have led to a tense situation involving the Texas National Guard and Border Patrol agents, are drawing closer to a potentially violent clash.
Governor Abbott, utilizing the Texas Guard, has implemented measures to block federal officers from performing their duties, as mandated by Congress and the President. This has been enabled in part by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, which has supported Abbott’s efforts to obstruct federal border enforcement.
The situation on the ground is intensifying. The Texas Guard is asserting more control over the border area, denying entry to all federal law enforcement, including active duty service members, even in emergencies. Such actions have already had dire consequences, as seen in the inability of federal officers to respond promptly to emergencies, like the tragic drowning incident of migrants.
This conflict stems from “Operation Lone Star,” Abbott’s initiative to assume control over immigration, a move that has been criticized for its ineffectiveness and inhumanity towards migrants. The operation has involved extensive use of razor wire and other physical barriers to hinder migrant movements and prevent Border Patrol from carrying out their responsibilities.
The Supreme Court is complicit in Texas’ armed standoff with the feds. https://t.co/pa0Xtp9X1Y
— Jenn Budd (@BuddJenn) January 19, 2024
Read More News: Risk for Jim Jordan and Ted Cruz if the Supreme Court Says Trump, is a Rebel!
13 Investigations Finds that Texas Was Charged $845,458 for Four Migrant Charter Trips!
Ohio Senate Candidate Accused of Wage Theft Shreds Documents Amid Lawsuit!
These actions by Texas, in direct contradiction to federal law, have led to a legal battle. The state sued the Department of Homeland Security for trespassing, a claim initially rejected by a district court but later embraced by the 5th Circuit. The Circuit’s decision, resting on debatable evidence and arguments, has further complicated the situation.
The Department of Justice’s appeal to the Supreme Court to intervene highlights the urgency of the matter. The continued delay by the Supreme Court in addressing this issue has raised questions about its stance and the potential consequences of its inaction.