Texas Can Arrest People Who Illegally Cross at Mexico Border, Court Says

The New York Times ^ | April 25, 2026, 3:11 p.m. ET | Amy Qin

[E. Pluribus Unum]

The court that paused a 2023 law allowing state and local police officers to arrest migrants has now ruled that the measure is legal, a decision likely to be appealed.

A federal appeals court cleared the way on Friday for Texas to act on an expansive 2023 state law that empowers state and local police officers to arrest migrants who cross illegally from Mexico, the latest development in a long-running case that could have far-reaching implications for immigration enforcement in the United States.

In a 10-to-7 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the law, known as Senate Bill 4, and lifted a temporary injunction that had been in place since 2024.

That year, the U.S. Supreme Court had briefly allowed the law to go into effect and returned the case to the 5th Circuit, which quickly put the law on hold. In July, a three-member panel of the 5th Circuit upheld the 2024 injunction. Texas has since continued to press its case and, on Friday, a majority of the full 5th Circuit sided with the state and removed the injunction.

The court, however, did not address the underlying question of whether the law unconstitutionally infringes on the federal government’s power to set and enforce immigration law.

The ruling does not take effect until May 15, and the challengers, which include civil rights and immigrants’ groups and the El Paso County government, have indicated that they intend to appeal the decision.

“This fight is far from over,” said Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the Immigrants’ Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs, in a statement.

The Texas Legislature had passed the...

---

TOPICS: Crime/Corruption
KEYWORDS:

[rktman]

Uh, breaking and entering/trespassing.

[wildcard_redneck]

It is a crime called trespassing.

[PubliusMM]

Libturd heads are spinning over this one. Time will tell, but I rather imagine the left is judge shopping for the appeal...

[HartleyMBaldwin]

Texas law enforcement is simply assisting federal law enforcement. Texas isn’t changing U.S. immigration law in any way.

The Fifth Circuit should just have made the obvious decision two years ago, and not be weaseling now with nonsense about “standing”.

[T.B. Yoits]

Anyone can enforce that law, not just police officers in Texas.

[AndyJackson]

This fight is far from over,” said Cody Wofsy

Uh, Sir Wofsy, I think it is since you lost at the Supreme Court and then lost at the US Court of Appeals after they bent over backwards to give you a fair hearing. You could try the SC again, but you will get 3 votes to take the case.

[PeterPrinciple]

Anyone can enforce that law

---

the net says:

Copilot Search Branding

Like

Dislike
Who Can Enforce Laws in the United States
In the U.S., no individual can unilaterally “enforce” a law — enforcement is a constitutional role reserved for the government’s executive branch, with specific limits and checks.

Primary enforcement authority
Under Article II of the U.S. Constitution, the President is vested with the “executive Power” and has the duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” legalclarity.org. This means the President oversees the machinery of enforcement — federal agencies, prosecutors, and law enforcement officers — but does not personally carry out every action. The Attorney General and other agency heads implement and direct enforcement activities legalclarity.org.

State-level enforcement
State governors have similar authority over state laws within their states legalclarity.org. Local law enforcement agencies (police, sheriffs, etc.) also enforce laws within their jurisdictions.

Congress’s role
The Fourteenth Amendment, Section 5 gives Congress the power to “enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article” Constitution Annotated. This means Congress can pass laws to address constitutional violations, such as discrimination or denial of equal protection. However, Congress cannot directly order enforcement; it can only create laws that the executive branch can then implement lawshun.com.

Judicial role
Courts interpret laws and can declare them unconstitutional, but they do not directly enforce them. The Supreme Court can invalidate laws or executive actions that violate the Constitution, but it cannot order the President or agencies to act in a particular way lawshun.com.

Limits and discretion
While the President cannot outright refuse to enforce a law passed by Congress, they can deprioritize enforcement based on resources or policy focus lawshun.com. For example, a President might direct the DOJ to focus on certain crimes over others. However, ordering the complete cessation of enforcement could be unconstitutional, as the Constitution requires the President to faithfully execute laws lawshun.com.

Key takeaway
Only the executive branch (President, Attorney General, federal agencies) and state governors have the constitutional power to enforce laws. Congress can create enforcement tools, and courts can invalidate laws, but no private person can enforce a law without the government’s authority.

[moviefan8]

The federal government has jurdisction regarding immigration matters, not the state.

If Texas can arrest illegal immigrants, then sanctuary cities, counties, and states would be allowable becuase it deals with immigration.

[moviefan8]

The money quote.

https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/fifth-circuit-rules-challenge-to-extreme-texas-immigration-law-must-be-dismissed-on-procedural-grounds#:~:text=The%20full%20court%20did%20not,at%20least%20until%20that%20date.

“No state should have the ability to create and enforce its own immigration laws. Texas’ Senate Bill 4 upends constitutional precedent, tears apart our democracy, and oppresses Texans through racial profiling. It is unacceptable that in a majority-minority state, our elected officials continue to legislatively target our communities. As a border state, as Texans, and as humans, we should be leading with dignity and due process for all communities,” said Rochelle Garza, president of the Texas Civil Rights Project.

[T.B. Yoits]

Well, the Indian "programmers" pretending to be 'Copilot' Artificial Intelligence can look up a citizen's arrest.

If you're going to use "AI" slop as a resource, please don't include me in any comment. I'd accept Dr. Seuss before I accepted that nonsense.

[T.B. Yoits]

If Texas can arrest illegal immigrants, then sanctuary cities, counties, and states would be allowable becuase it deals with immigration.

Wow, what a comparison.

Texas is enforcing Federal Law. Sanctuary cities, counties, and states, are aiding and abetting violators of Federal Law.

[moviefan8]

The Texas law is unconstitutional becuase it is an immigration law.

No state should have the ability to create and enforce its own immigration laws.

[moviefan8]

S.B. 4, passed by the Texas Legislature in 2023, makes it a state crime to enter Texas from Mexico without authorization and allows local police to arrest people based on immigration status. The law also allows state officers to order people removed — a power that has never belonged to state governments.

[T.B. Yoits]

Yet the COURT said it's legal.

No state should have the ability NEED to create and enforce its own immigration laws.

[itsahoot]

Strange a little over two years ago they couldn’t, in fact the court ruled that only the President could enforce immigration laws, unless it is Trump, I guess.

[moviefan8]

If the Texas law is legal, then sanctuary cities, etc. are acceptable and legal. They can pass their own immigration laws.

[T.B. Yoits]

S.B.4 ...allows local police to arrest people based on immigration status

Again, any citizen can arrest illegal alien invaders.

Texas did not create their own immigration law. Texas is not saying "We decided whether you're allowed in Texas or not."

Texas is saying "You violated Federal Law and are not allowed in Texas NOR IN ANY OF THE OTHER 49 STATES OR U.S. TERRITORIES."

The perp's citizenship was determined when they were born, when they renounced their U.S. citizenship if they had it, or were stripped of their U.S. citizenship for crimes. At no time did Texas declare them a citizen or not a citizen.

[marron]

Obviously, Texas wouldn’t be creating and enforcing its own immigration laws. They would simply be enforcing federal law, as they already do seven days a week.

[No name given]

Exactly.