In a significant legal blow to Governor Greg Abbott’s immigration crackdown, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has upheld a preliminary injunction blocking Texas from enforcing its controversial Senate Bill 4 (SB 4), which would have allowed state and local officers to arrest and deport individuals suspected of illegally entering the state from a foreign country.

The 2-1 ruling, issued on July 3, emphasized the longstanding principle that the federal government—not individual states—has exclusive authority over immigration enforcement. The opinion, authored by Judge Priscilla Richman, affirmed the district court’s finding that at least one plaintiff—Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center—had standing to challenge the law, and that the law is likely preempted by federal statutes and constitutional principles.

Background on SB 4

Passed by the Texas Legislature in a 2023 special session, SB 4 created two new state crimes: “Illegal Entry from Foreign Nation” and “Illegal Reentry by Certain Aliens.” The law authorized local law enforcement and judges to arrest, prosecute, and even order the removal of individuals suspected of violating immigration laws—powers historically exercised only by the federal government.

Under SB 4, failure to comply with a state judge’s removal order could result in felony charges punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The law explicitly barred courts from pausing prosecutions based on pending federal immigration determinations.

Key Plaintiff: Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center

The court’s ruling centered on the injury SB 4 would cause to Las Americas, a nonprofit legal services organization based in El Paso. The panel found that implementation of SB 4 would significantly interfere with Las Americas’s core mission of providing legal counsel to asylum seekers and other immigrants.

Evidence presented to the district court showed that Las Americas would be forced to:

• Train staff and develop new materials specific to SB 4-related detentions;
• Divert resources from federal immigration cases to represent individuals detained under the new state law;
• Struggle to maintain access to clients held in state or county jails, which operate separately from federal immigration detention centers.

The court cited Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman to support its finding that such interference with an organization’s operations constitutes a cognizable injury for standing. The majority rejected the State’s argument that any injury was self-inflicted or speculative, instead concluding that enforcement of SB 4 would directly disrupt Las Americas’s legal services and reduce the number of clients it could serve.

Enforcement and Public Safety Arguments Rejected

Texas DPS Director Freeman Martin was the sole remaining appellant after other state officials and prosecutors dropped their appeals. Martin argued that SB 4 was a lawful exercise of the state’s power under the U.S. Constitution’s “State War Clause,” which allows states to act in emergencies when “actually invaded” or in “imminent danger.”

The Fifth Circuit rejected that argument, ruling that enforcement of immigration laws—even in the face of high migration levels—remains a matter of federal authority. The court cited Supreme Court precedent affirming that even perceived threats or emergencies do not give states carte blanche to bypass federal supremacy.

In support of the district court’s injunction, the appellate court noted that the Texas Department of Public Safety anticipated making up to 80,000 additional arrests annually under SB 4, based on sworn testimony from former Director Steve McCraw. The court found this evidence supported a clear and imminent impact on organizations like Las Americas.

Broader Implications and Next Steps

The ruling leaves intact the lower court’s preliminary injunction, meaning SB 4 remains unenforceable while litigation continues. The decision is a major setback for Governor Abbott’s border enforcement strategy and may affect other states pursuing similar measures.

Although the U.S. Department of Justice initially challenged SB 4 alongside nonprofit and local government plaintiffs, it voluntarily dismissed its claim earlier this year. The Fifth Circuit emphasized that even without the federal government as a party, the case remained viable due to Las Americas’s established standing.

The panel’s ruling did not address the claims brought by American Gateways or El Paso County, choosing instead to focus solely on Las Americas and DPS Director Martin.

A dissenting opinion argued that the majority had improperly extended organizational standing doctrine and should have deferred to Texas’s judgment on its public safety needs. However, the majority held firm that the Constitution’s supremacy clause—and not political discretion—controls the outcome.

Quote from the Opinion

“The state laws differ in significant respects from federal laws and were intended to permit the state to apprehend and arrest large numbers of immigrants that the federal government had not apprehended or would not apprehend,” Judge Richman wrote. “Las Americas has shown far more than simply a setback to the organization’s abstract social interests.”

The case now returns to the district court for further proceedings, but Texas may still ask the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene. For now, the federal judiciary has made clear: immigration enforcement remains a federal responsibility.

---

---

Disclaimer

The content provided in this publication is for educational and informational purposes only. The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News strives to deliver accurate and impactful stories. However, readers are advised to seek professional legal counsel and guidance for their specific legal inquiries and concerns. The publication does not assume any responsibility for actions taken by individuals based on the information presented. 

Additionally, while every effort is made to ensure the reliability of the information, the publication does not warrant the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the content. Readers are encouraged to verify any legal information with official sources and to use their discretion when interpreting and applying the information provided.

A Couple of Our Other Reads

You may be interested in our publishing on the 772 arrest notifications TCOLE received in 2024..

Or you may find our publishing on a newly elected Texas sheriff’s battle with TCOLE over the accuracy of his personal history statement of interest.  

Follow Us on Social Media

If you are interested in staying updated on matters about your government in Texas and other important stories, trust The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News to provide reliable information that matters to you. You can follow us on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, X, Reddit, YouTube, Tumblr, and LinkedIn to stay connected and informed.

FACEBOOK: TheHawksEyeNews
INSTAGRAM: Hawk_s_Eye_C_and_N
X: TheHawksEyeNews
REDDIT: TheHawksEyeCN
YOUTUBE: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
TUMBLR: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
LINKEDIN: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News

---