Federal Judge Blocks TX New Anti-Immigration Law

U.S. District Court Judge Orlando Garcia has issued a 94 page opinion (available here) blocking the implementation the most significant provisions of Texas S.B. 4, which had been scheduled to go into effect Sept. 1. The case is City of El Cenizo v State of Texas.

The ACLU says:

The law, recently signed by Gov. Greg Abbott, strips localities and local law enforcement in the state of the authority to determine how to best use their limited resources to ensure the safety of their communities. The law also turns Texas into a “show me your papers” state. Law enforcement

Thank you, ACLU.

< Sunday Open Thread: Hiatus | Labor Day Weekend Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    A federal district judge in Texas has also (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Peter G on Fri Sep 01, 2017 at 09:24:21 AM EST
    enjoined the latest Texas state anti-abortion-rights legislation. The Fifth Circuit, the federal appeals court that encompasses Texas, remains one of the most conservative in the country, however, so whether the injunction (or the one blocking the state from coercing cities with regard to immigration enforcement policy) will stand is not predictable. On the other hand, the latest Supreme Court decision invalidating the previous iteration of this legislation establishes good precedent for the challengers, since it focuses on whether the Legislature's supposed "scientific" justifications for the restrictions have any basis in evidence ... which they don't.

    Anyone care to start a pool (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Peter G on Fri Sep 01, 2017 at 03:10:57 PM EST
    on how soon it comes out that Tr*mp has not donated $1 million of his own money to relief efforts in and around Houston? That it never happens at all, or the amount is much less, or it comes from some other source?

    Hah! I vote for the (none / 0) (#7)
    by desertswine on Fri Sep 01, 2017 at 03:21:44 PM EST
    "never gonna happen" option.

    Ohoh... (none / 0) (#8)
    by desertswine on Fri Sep 01, 2017 at 03:28:47 PM EST
    Bazinga! (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Sep 01, 2017 at 03:35:14 PM EST
    The monies (if any) will come from the Trump Organization or the Trump Foundation. Not one dime will come from any personal bank account.

    But only after (none / 0) (#10)
    by Nemi on Sat Sep 02, 2017 at 06:11:39 AM EST
    a member of the eternally whining -- despite being privileged in the extreme -- first family, this time Eric (aka. "Fredo") had a chance to lament the media's unfair coverage:

    Eric Trump Predicts CNN Won't Cover Harvey Donation After CNN Covered It.

    And then there's this

    Watch as Trump Calls On A Bunch of Religious Leaders to Thank Him For His Harvey Efforts.

    Contrary to the religious leaders I have no words ... just head shaking and eye rolling.


    Your second link should come with a warning (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by vml68 on Sun Sep 03, 2017 at 12:16:09 PM EST
    to have a barf bag handy!

    You're not kidding. (none / 0) (#13)
    by desertswine on Sun Sep 03, 2017 at 11:41:34 PM EST
    CNN's coverage appears to me to qualify (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Peter G on Sun Sep 03, 2017 at 07:52:25 PM EST
    as "fake news." CNN's tweet (per link above) said, "President Trump will donate $1 million to Texas recovery efforts."  Yet they had no source, and could not have had, to establish the truth of that assertion. Real news would have been, "President Trump claims he will donate $1 million to Texas recovery efforts."

    everyone knows (none / 0) (#1)
    by linea on Wed Aug 30, 2017 at 10:43:23 PM EST
    that i support seattle's 'sanctuary city' statute as it not only protects civil rights but is also good policing.

    The Supreme Court stated that as a "general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States" and that "if the police stop someone based on nothing more than possible removability, the usual predicate for an arrest is absent."

    The PI is only temp and partial (none / 0) (#2)
    by ragebot on Wed Aug 30, 2017 at 11:37:11 PM EST
    The law was suppose to start on Friday.  The PI only delays parts of the law while the suit goes on.  Texas said they will appeal the decision to grant a PI in the 5th Circuit, which is the most conservative circuit court.

    Blurb from the NYT article

    Judge Garcia upheld the law's provision that police officers can ask about the immigration status of those they detain or arrest.

    from the same NY Times article (none / 0) (#3)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Aug 31, 2017 at 12:26:11 AM EST
    A federal judge in San Antonio on Wednesday blocked Texas from enforcing its ban on so-called sanctuary cities, questioning the constitutionality of a law that has pitted Republican state leaders against several Democratic-leaning cities.

    The judge's ruling was only temporary, and prevents the law from taking effect on Friday while a suit against it goes forward.

    The court properly struck down virtually all of what was perhaps the harshest anti-immigrant provision in modern times," said Lee Gelernt, who is the deputy director of the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project and who represents the border town of El Cenizo and other plaintiffs in the suit.

    Judge Garcia upheld the law's provision that police officers can ask about the immigration status of those they detain or arrest. But he blocked the provision mandating that local jurisdictions comply with immigration detainer requests from the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.

    that's disappointing (none / 0) (#4)
    by linea on Thu Aug 31, 2017 at 12:40:55 AM EST
    police officers can ask about the immigration status of those they detain

    once someone answers "i'm a u.s. citizen," how do local police establish probable cause to refute that assertion - other than 'you look funny' or 'you talk funny.'