A divided U.S. appeals court has handed a significant victory to Texas in its ongoing legal battle with the Biden administration over the state’s controversial razor-wire fencing along its southern border. In a 2-1 decision, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Biden administration must halt efforts to remove the fencing, which Texas placed along the Rio Grande in a bid to deter illegal immigration. The court’s ruling clears the way for Texas to pursue a lawsuit accusing the federal government of trespassing on its property.
The court’s majority opinion, written by Circuit Judge Kyle Duncan, a Trump appointee, rejected the Biden administration’s argument that removing the fence would interfere with federal immigration enforcement. Duncan argued that Texas was not attempting to regulate U.S. Border Patrol but was simply protecting its property rights. He emphasized that Texas is likely to prevail on its trespass claims, and said the public interest supports the protection of property rights from government intrusion.
The decision marks a major setback for the Biden administration, which had sought to remove the fence as part of its broader efforts to de-escalate tensions over border security. The razor-wire fence, which was erected in 2023, runs along the Rio Grande near Eagle Pass, Texas, in an area known for high levels of illegal migration. The federal government had argued that removing the fence was necessary for federal law enforcement efforts to function smoothly and for U.S.-Mexico relations to remain cooperative.
However, Judge Duncan dismissed these concerns, stating that the federal government had waived its sovereign immunity and was unlikely to succeed in its defense. In addition, the ruling noted that the federal government’s attempt to force the removal of the fence would unfairly infringe upon Texas’ rights to protect its land.
The decision was not unanimous. Circuit Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez, a Biden appointee, dissented, expressing concern that the court’s ruling would allow Texas to exert “virtual power of review” over federal immigration efforts. Ramirez argued that Texas had not demonstrated that the federal government waived its sovereign immunity and contended that the ruling could undermine the federal government’s ability to enforce immigration laws effectively.
In her dissent, Ramirez highlighted the broader implications of allowing states to take unilateral actions that could hinder federal enforcement of laws meant to govern the entire country. “This case presents serious questions about the authority of the federal government to execute laws designed to manage immigration,” Ramirez wrote.
The court’s ruling comes amid escalating political tensions over border security. Republicans, including Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, have been vocal in criticizing President Biden’s handling of illegal immigration, citing a surge in migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. In a statement on social media, Paxton hailed the ruling as a “huge win for Texas,” underscoring the state’s commitment to securing its borders despite challenges from the federal government.
The Biden administration has faced ongoing legal battles with Texas and other Republican-led states over their efforts to curb illegal immigration, including the use of barriers and other deterrents. These states have sought to impose tougher immigration laws, which they argue are necessary in light of what they perceive as the Biden administration’s lax enforcement.
This legal conflict is part of a broader national debate on immigration and border security, which has become one of the most contentious issues in American politics. Texas has previously clashed with the federal government over its efforts to construct border barriers, including a floating barrier in the Rio Grande, which is also under legal review by the 5th Circuit.
While Texas has won this round in court, the legal battle is far from over. The Biden administration has yet to respond to the ruling, and the case could ultimately be appealed to a higher court. In addition, other lawsuits are ongoing, including a case involving Texas’ plan to arrest and prosecute people living in the U.S. illegally, which has been temporarily blocked by a lower court.
As the 5th Circuit continues to review cases related to Texas’ border security measures, the outcome of this legal dispute will have far-reaching consequences for U.S. immigration policy. The conservative-leaning 5th Circuit is considered one of the most influential federal appeals courts, and its decisions on immigration could shape future legal battles nationwide.
Read more:
Federal Judge Kacsmaryk Rules In Favor Of Biden Administration In 2 Key Legal Battles
FTC Investigates Microsoft For Antitrust Violations In Cloud And Software Licensing Practices
What Should Be In A Vendor Contract?