Challenge to Biden Administration deportation policy rejected by U.S. Supreme Court

Mississippi was among the states supporting Texas and Louisiana’s challenge to the Biden Administration’s border policy.

In an 8-1 opinion handed down on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a challenge to the Biden Administration’s deportation policy in what justices termed “an extraordinarily unusual lawsuit.”

Justice Samuel Alito was the lone dissenter.

The challenge came from the states of Texas and Louisiana after the Department of Homeland Security issued new guidelines for immigration enforcement in 2021. The guidelines prioritized the arrest and removal of non-citizens who are suspected terrorists or dangerous criminals, or who have unlawfully entered the country only recently.

Texas and Louisiana sued the Department of Homeland Security. The states argued that the Department’s new guidelines violated federal statutes that purportedly required the Department to arrest more criminal non-citizens pending their removal. As stated by Justice Brett Kavanuagh on behalf of the Court, the states essentially wanted the Federal Judiciary to order the Executive Branch to alter its arrest policy so as to make more arrests.

“But this Court has long held ‘that a citizen lacks standing to contest the policies of the prosecuting authority when he himself is neither prosecuted nor threatened with prosecution,'” Justice Kavanaugh wrote. “Consistent with that fundamental Article III principle, we conclude that the States lack Article III standing to bring this suit.”

Kavanaugh goes on to say that the states brought an extraordinarily unusual lawsuit.

“They want a federal court to order the Executive Branch to alter its arrest policies so as to make more arrests. Federal courts have not traditionally entertained that kind of lawsuit; indeed, the States cite no precedent for a lawsuit like this,” the Justice wrote for the majority.

However, while the states lack standing, according to the opinion, Justice Kavanaugh wrote that the justices “do not suggest that federal courts may never entertain cases involving the Executive Branch’s alleged failure to make more arrests or bring more prosecutions.”

Justice Kavanaugh goes on to opine that other forums exist for examining the Administration’s policies, namely Congress and the ballot box.

“Congress possesses an array of tools to analyze and influence those policies—oversight, appropriations, the legislative process, and Senate confirmations, to name a few,” the opinion outlines. “And through elections, American voters can both influence Executive Branch policies and hold elected officials to account for enforcement decisions. In any event, those are political checks for the political process. We do not opine on whether any such actions are appropriate in this instance.”

Mississippi was among the other states that filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in support of Texas and Louisiana. The other states included Arizona, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming.