Sotomayor criticized the majority of the Supreme Court on Tuesday for temporarily allowing a Texas law to take effect. This law gives Texas law enforcement the power to arrest people they suspect of illegally entering the United States from Mexico. Sotomayor warned that allowing this controversial law to take effect without carefully considering its constitutionality could lead to more chaos and crisis in immigration enforcement.
In her disagreement, Sotomayor cautioned that allowing this highly controversial law to take effect without first carefully considering its constitutionality would lead to more chaos and crisis in immigration enforcement.
Sotomayor pointed out that Texas passed a law directly regulating the entry and removal of noncitizens, which disrupts the federal-state balance of power that has existed for over a century, giving exclusive authority to the National Government over entry and removal of noncitizens.
Sotomayor stated that the Court gives approval to a law that will upset the longstanding federal-state balance of power and cause chaos.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed the statute, SB4, making illegal immigration a state crime and enabling state and local law enforcement to arrest undocumented migrants, potentially facing deportation or jail time.
The Biden administration sued to stop SB4, arguing it is an “unprecedented intrusion into federal immigration enforcement.”
The U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar stated that SB4 is inconsistent with federal law and is therefore preempted on its face.
A federal district judge blocked SB4, but the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals later issued an administrative stay allowing the law to temporarily take effect.
The Justice Department sought emergency relief from the Supreme Court to put the law on hold, but the Supreme Court returned the case to the appeals court for a decision on whether the law should be paused during the appeal process.
Administrative stays are usually implemented for a brief period until the court decides whether to issue a longer pause, but Sotomayor is concerned that the 5th Circuit has allowed the administrative stays to linger, allowing laws to take effect without careful review of their constitutionality.
Sotomayor dissented, disagreeing with the Court's decision to defer to a lower court's management of its docket and criticizing the 5th Circuit's decision to enter an unreasoned and indefinite administrative stay that altered the status quo.
Sotomayor wrote that the Fifth Circuit issued a one-sentence administrative order that is maximally disruptive to foreign relations, national security, the federal-state balance of power, and the lives of noncitizens, and the Court should not allow this state of affairs.
