Austin judge weighs SB4 jurisdiction rights
State’s attorney recognizes potential upside in advertisement to the legal challenge ahead
AUSTIN — The Austin-based judge weighing Texas’ preemptive sanctuary cities lawsuit against Travis County was persistently skeptical in court Thursday about whether he had the appropriate jurisdiction to take the case away from another judge in San Antonio who already started hearing evidence in a related legal challenge.
David Hacker, an attorney representing the state, asked U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks to deny Travis County’s request to throw out a lawsuit brought by Attorney General Ken Paxton last month. Paxton is seeking a declaratory judgment on the constitutionality of Senate Bill 4, the controversial measure Republican state legislators approved in May. Hacker also argued that Sparks’ Austin courtroom is the proper venue to litigate Senate Bill 4 matters, urging the judge to merge their case with a broader legal challenge underway in a San Antonio court and hear the entire argument in Austin.
Case ‘belongs’ in Austin
“This case belongs to you,” Hacker told Sparks. “This court easily could take the evidence (from San Antonio), consolidate it here and make the ultimate decision.”
Sparks balked at Hacker’s request to move the case, which has drawn national attention as the next major immigration-related battle. He also said he has an unrelated trial beginning in August that likely will stretch beyond Sept. 1, when the law will take effect.
“I have twice the docket he has,” Sparks said, referring to the San Antonio jurist, U.S. District Court Judge Orlando Garcia. “San Antonio has a track record of evidence that Judge Garcia can take into consideration.”
The law, Senate Bill 4, will permit local police officers to inquire about the immigration status of people they legally detain or arrest. It also would punish elected officials who do not honor every request from federal immigration authorities to hold a person until their status can be investigated. Officials who do not comply, from police chiefs to county sheriffs, can be charged with a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by a $1,000 fine for a first offense and up to $25,000 for each infraction that follows. They could be removed from office, as well.
Partisan politics
During Monday’s nearly seven-hour hearing in San Antonio, Garcia heard from a coalition of cities, counties and civil rights groups who argued that SB 4 is vague and was designed to discriminate against minority Texans, particularly Latinos. The state’s lawyers said the law was meant to create a uniform process by which local law enforcement agencies cooperate with federal immigration authorities, rejecting claims about racial animus.
In a nod to the partisan politics surrounding the case, Sparks said several times that both sides — the Republican state lawmakers who passed the law and the local Democratic officials who oppose it — see a potential upside to the legal challenge ahead.
“The city of Austin got in this because it’s political and they get a lot of advertisement,” said Sparks, who did not say when he would reach a decision.