Республиканцы Техаса поддерживают резолюцию о праве штатов защищать границы от «вторжения»
Республиканский кокус Техаса в Палате представителей США объявил о своей поддержке резолюции конгрессмена Джоди Аррингтона. Документ утверждает, что штаты обладают конституционными полномочиями для обеспечения безопасности своих границ в условиях «вторжения» или «неминуемой опасности». Партия призывает Конгресс одобрить эту меру, критикуя политику администрации Джо Байдена, которая, по мнению республиканцев, привела к неконтролируемому росту незаконной иммиграции.Резолюция H.Res. 50, впервые представленная в 2021 году, опирается на Статью I, раздел 10 Конституции США, которая позволяет штатам защищать свою территорию и граждан. Республиканцы аргументируют это тем, что федеральное правительство не выполняет свои обязательства по защите штатов от вторжения, предусмотренные Статьей IV, разделом 4.Конгрессмен Джоди Аррингтон отметил, что инициатива направлена на предотвращение повторения ситуации, возникшей при администрации Байдена, когда штаты столкнулись с перегрузкой из-за нелегальной миграции и наркотрафика. Он подчеркнул связь между неконтролируемой границей и ростом смертности от фентанила, назвав деятельность картелей «химической войной».Эксперты по правовым вопросам отмечают сложность вопроса: согласно текущей практике Верховного суда США, контроль иммиграции является прерогативой федерального правительства. Однако бывший заместитель помощника генерального прокурора Джон Ю указал, что если Палата представителей официально признает ситуацию на границе «неминуемой опасностью», это может стать юридическим обоснованием для действий штатов.Параллельно с этим в Техасе продолжаются судебные споры вокруг законопроекта SB 4. Данный закон наделяет полицию правом арестовывать мигрантов, подозреваемых в незаконном пересечении границы, а судей — полномочиями выносить решения о депортации. Правозащитные организации, включая ACLU, подали иск против SB 4, утверждая, что закон неконституционен, так как вопросы иммиграционного контроля относятся исключительно к компетенции федеральной власти. Несмотря на временную отмену запрета на исполнение закона апелляционным судом, юридическое противостояние продолжается.
Texas GOP backs resolution saying states have right to repel border ‘invasion’
EXCLUSIVE: The U.S. House’s Texas GOP Caucus announced Thursday that it is united behind a resolution from Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, arguing that states have constitutional authority to secure their borders against an "invasion" or "imminent danger."The caucus is urging Congress to approve the measure, citing what Republicans called the "failed open-border policies" under former President Joe Biden and the millions of illegal immigrants who crossed into the country during his administration."It is the job of elected officials to protect the Americans that sent them to office," Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "Unfortunately, we’ve seen Democrat leaders willfully facilitate a border invasion time and time again. States ought to be able to step in and secure the border when federal government cannot or will not do so. I am proud to join the Texas GOP Caucus in standing up for the American people."The House resolution, first introduced in 2021 in response to the border crisis under the Biden administration, affirms that states have a right under the Constitution to secure their borders if the federal government fails to act. Courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have long treated immigration enforcement as primarily a federal responsibility.CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS FILE LAWSUIT SEEKING TO BLOCK TEXAS LAW ALLOWING COPS TO ARREST ILLEGAL MIGRANTSH.Res. 50 says states retain sovereign authority under Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution to defend their territory and citizens from "invasion" or "imminent danger" when the federal government fails to meet what Republicans describe as its Article IV, Section 4 obligation to protect states from invasion.In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, Arrington said the U.S.-Mexico border has largely been secured under the Trump administration but argued his resolution is needed to ensure states can act if a Democrat returns to the White House."What we want to avoid is what happened during the four years of the Biden administration, which is, we had a bunch of states being overrun and overwhelmed with illegal immigration and all the various problems that occurred as a result. We didn't have a federal government that was doing its job and, in fact, we had a federal government that was obstructing states like Texas from actually filling the gap that they left because they abdicated that responsibility," the congressman said.Arrington argued that fentanyl and other drugs flowing across the border contributed to more than 100,000 overdose deaths in a single year during the Biden administration, while illegal border crossings, cartel activity and drug and human trafficking strained border states."The drugs were killing hundreds of thousands, they were killing a plane load of American citizens every week," Arrington said. "They killed over 100,000 Americans in one year, which is more than we lost in the Vietnam War. When you're losing more American citizens to what is tantamount to chemical warfare from the Mexican terrorist drug cartels, in close cooperation with the Chinese who were providing the precursor material for synthetic fentanyl, that was the greatest and most imminent threat to our nation during those four years."The congressman highlighted that his resolution has received support from the Texas GOP Caucus, conservative organizations, law enforcement officials and legal experts.DOJ ACCUSES COURTS OF UNDERCUTTING EXECUTIVE POWER IN HIGH-STAKES SUPREME COURT BORDER CASE"The Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, forbids states from interfering with the federal government’s monopoly over our territorial sovereignty," John Yoo, former deputy assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel, said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "But the House of Representatives could make its own findings of fact that failures at the border rose to the level of an ‘imminent danger’ that would justify a state’s exercise of self-defense. Such a set of findings might bolster Texas’s case in the courts as well as its political case to the public. Without such congressional support, Texas is likely to fail."In a press release obtained by Fox News Digital, Texas GOP Caucus Chairman Rep. Nathaniel Moran, R-Texas, said "the Framers understood that a state cannot be left at the mercy of a federal government that refuses to do its job when there’s an invasion at its border.""That's why Article I, Section 10 exists — and that's exactly the situation Texas and our border states faced for four years under the Biden administration. H.Res. 50 affirms what the Constitution already guarantees: states have every right to defend its citizens. The Texas GOP Caucus is united in ensuring that right is recognized and preserved," he said.The resolution comes amid a legal battle over Texas Senate Bill 4, a state measure that would allow police officers to arrest migrants suspected of illegally crossing into the U.S. and authorize state judges to order certain migrants to leave the country.The law is set to take effect next week after a federal appeals court vacated a lower court ruling last month that had blocked enforcement. The appeals court found the plaintiffs in that case did not have standing to sue, but it did not resolve the broader constitutional questions surrounding the law.S.B. 4 established a state-level crime for illegal entry and authorized state magistrates to order certain individuals to leave the country if they are convicted.Arrington told Fox News Digital that Texas’ S.B. 4 could soon reach the U.S. Supreme Court as legal challenges continue.The Texas Civil Rights Project, the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Texas filed a new lawsuit this week seeking emergency relief to block several provisions of the Texas measure before they take effect May 15.The groups argue the law is unconstitutional, saying immigration enforcement is exclusively the responsibility of the federal government and that federal law should preempt the state statute.Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, argued that S.B. 4 is "cruel and illegal," adding that the groups "will keep fighting it until it is permanently struck down.""Every court to have reached the merits of laws like S.B. 4 has found them to be unconstitutional," he said in a statement.The three groups did not respond to Fox News Digital's requests for comment on Arrington's resolution in time for publication.