5th Circ. Allows Part Of TX Sanctuary Ban To Take Effect

Share

The appeals court also threw out the injunction on the section of the Texas law that requires local law enforcement to "comply with, honor, and fulfill" any immigration detainer request issued by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Steglich said with these civil cases, ICE can not obtain a criminal warrant, the only formal request that allows sheriff's offices to hold someone in a county jail for longer than their bond or criminal sentence dictates.

"As I have maintained throughout this process, I have not violated federal or state law, nor do I intend", Hernandez said in a news release.

Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton hailed the decision as allowing the state to "enforce the core" of the law known at Senate Bill 4.

Still, the ruling is a victory for Paxton and Abbott, and they celebrated it as such. They also say it illegally puts local police in the federal role of immigration enforcement officers, and is unconstitutionally vague as to exactly when a local law enforcement officer would be in violation of the law.

"We are pleased today's 5th Circuit ruling will allow Texas to strengthen public safety by implementing the key components of Senate Bill 4", Paxton said in a statement.

But hours after Monday's ruling, Hernandez met with county attorneys and chose to rescind the policy.

Thomas A. Saenz, the president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said in a statement that the group was dismayed by Monday's ruling. "I am hopeful that the court's final ruling will protect our state's immigrant communities".

Today's ruling by the court in New Orleans reversed, in part, an injunction against the law. She says her reading of the ruling isn't that all detainer requests are now mandatory. Hernandez appears to have agreed with that reading. Elected officials found to have violated the law could be tossed from office. The decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals comes almost a month after a lower court judge blocked most of the law signed in May by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott. The three-judge panel's decision was unanimous.

Officially called detainer requests, these asks come after someone is arrested and booked in a local jail for any type of crime. Local law enforcement agencies also will be able to prioritize local law enforcement actions on immigration.

Porsche unveils the 2018 Panamera Sport Turismo S E-Hybrid
The new flagship tourer comes with the regular Turbo Sport Turismo's 542bhp 4.0-litre V8 biturbo engine, says Auto Express . That part has to be true, but the total output of 650 HP and 600 lb-ft (812 Nm) of torque sounds a little exaggerated.

Among its provisions, SB 4 includes a "Papers Please"-style rule that allows officers to inquire about the immigration status of people they detain - a portion of SB 4 Garcia did not stop in his injunction".

San Antonio federal District Judge Orlando Garcia blocked implementation of most on SB 4 on August 30, ruling that several portions of the law violated the First and Fourth amendments while other parts were pre-empted by federal law.

Texas had appealed a lower court ruling last month that blocked much of SB 4 from going into effect September 1.

The above-quoted provision is now being allowed to take effect pending further litigation. That lawsuit was later joined by the Cities of Austin, Dallas, Houston and El Paso, amongst other plaintiffs.

Casar said he's working around the clock with community and legal groups to craft a policy that reinforces those priorities as soon as possible.

"Every local government and local law enforcement agency can take important steps in the coming days to defy Abbott's racist coercion", Casar said in a statement.

This recent decision only addresses whether or not SB 4 can be the law of the land while this lawsuit is hashed out in court. Presiding Judge Orlando Garcia has not yet set a date for the trial.

A hearing is scheduled for November 6.

The Fifth Circuit has yet to rule on the merits of SB 4 itself, and the case could eventually make its way to the Supreme Court.

Share