Parts of SB4 upheld
Local agencies must honor federal request to hold immigrants
An appeals court rules that local law enforcement agencies must honor immigration hold requests but can’t be penalized for not helping enforce federal laws.
AUSTIN — Local law enforcement agencies across Texas will have to honor federal immigration holds for people who are in the country illegally but will not be penalized for failing to help enforce federal law, an appeals court ruled Monday in allowing parts of Texas’ so-called sanctuary city law to take effect temporarily.
In a mixed ruling that allowed both sides to claim partial victory, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals let stand a lower court ruling that had temporarily halted portions of the law that required local agencies to provide enforcement help to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The unanimous decision allows the controversy over the law — known as Senate Bill 4 — to continue for weeks or longer in Texas, where protests against the provisions have been ongoing for months.
The court set a hearing for Nov. 6 to hear arguments from Houston, San Antonio and other cities, counties and Hispanic advocacy groups that claim the law is unconstitutional because it violates the Fourth Amendment right requiring probable cause for
a person to be held behind bars.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who had asked the appeals court Friday to allow the full law to take effect, insisted Monday’s ruling was a victory.
“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 after the 3-0 decision was filed Monday morning.
“Enforcing immigration law helps prevent dangerous criminals from being released into Texas communities. I am confident Senate Bill 4 will be found constitutional and ultimately upheld,” he said.
Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Los Angeles-based Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, a leading voice for Latino civil rights, said Texas’ request for a fast ruling by the appeals court — before it hears arguments — reflects the ”mean-spiritedness of Texas state officials.”
“While that is a disappointment, the court only lifted two portions of the injunction,” Saenz said. “Because the court panel limited the scope of local police cooperation with enforcement that must be permitted, one portion of the stay would be of limited effect.”
‘Likely to succeed’
In its decision, however, the court noted that the state is “likely to succeed” on some of its arguments that the new law is constitutional.
Earlier this year, the Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 4 to require local law enforcement to cooperate with the federal government in enforcing the nation’s immigration laws. But a U.S. District Court in San Antonio granted an injunction on Aug. 30, just two days before it was scheduled to take effect.
In that order, U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia blocked the state from enforcing or implementing five key parts of the law, ruling they are likely unconstitutional. The state had asked the New Orleans-based appeals court to overrule the district court until the case is argued in court in November.
The state on Friday had asked the appeals court to allow it to begin enforcing the provisions of the new law, called Senate Bill 4 after the title of the legislation that was signed into law in June.
The Texas Civil Rights Project, an Austin-based group that represents two of the groups that filed the suit, said the Monday decision could cause unnecessary turmoil because it does not leave all parts of the lower court’s order in effect.
“We are disappointed and disagree with the panel’s decision to allow additional provisions of SB4 to go into effect and stand against Texas immigrants and families,” said Efren Olivares, racial and economic program director with the civil rights group.
TCRP represents the Texas Project Organizing Education Fund and MOVE San Antonio and has joined with attorneys representing El Paso officials.
The cities of Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, El Paso and El Cenizo, along with Bexar, Travis and Maverick counties and several Hispanic organizations, filed the court challenge to the new law.
Partisan divide
Among those who are suing to overturn the new law is Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez, whose refusal to honor the detainers touched off a highprofile fight with Gov. Greg Abbott that sparked the drive by conservative Republicans to enact SB4 over the objections of Democrats and Hispanic leaders.
State Rep. Rafael Anchia, chairman of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, which has opposed SB 4, said the court did not approve a provision allowing the state to punish cities and counties for limiting their officers on immigration questioning and enforcement assistance.
“We trust our local police — and not state politicians — to keep us safe,” said Anchia, a Dallas Democrat. “The court’s decision (Monday) recognizes those concerns and stops the most dangerous provisions contained in SB4 from taking effect. The fight is not over, however. We will continue to resist any law that aims to divide our great state and makes our constituents less safe.”