1. Home
  2. /
  3. Politics
  4. /
  5. Federal Judge Reverses Decision...

Federal Judge Reverses Decision on Temporary Order Blocking Federal Government’s Action on Texas Border Barriers

Homeland Security

A federal judge in the Western District of Texas has reversed a temporary restraining order that prevented the Department of Homeland Security from dismantling border barriers installed by the State of Texas.

The decision to reverse the order was made after the judge heard additional evidence and the case will now proceed to a trial. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and the Texas Public Policy Foundation had filed a lawsuit against the federal government to halt their interference in Texas’s efforts to control illegal border crossings.

Credits: DepositPhotos

The initial temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge Alia Moses had prohibited the disassembling, tampering, or degrading of the border barriers put in place by Texas under Governor Greg Abbott’s Operation Lone Star. However, the judge allowed for the federal government to take immediate action in medical emergencies involving distressed or injured migrants.

Read More: Rep Donalds Expresses Willingness to Serve as Trump’s Vice President in 2024 Presidential Race

Following a hearing on November 7, the judge heard testimonies from both the plaintiff and the defense regarding actions taken by Border Patrol agents to cut concertina wire and allow migrants to enter Texas from Mexico. On November 30, the judge issued a new order reversing the temporary restraining order and ordering the case to proceed to a trial.

In her ruling, Judge Moses stated that the evidence presented at the November 7 hearing and subsequent documents did not support the plaintiff’s claims of a substantial likelihood of success.

However, she acknowledged that the plaintiff’s concerns regarding the loss of control over their private property satisfied the irreparable harm prong of preliminary injunction analysis.

The judge also highlighted several matters that will require further examination in trial, including whether the actions taken by the agency constitute a final agency action and the uniqueness of border wire cutting in the Del Rio Sector.

The defendants argued that this issue was limited to the Del Rio Sector and not an agency-wide directive.

Also Read: Meta AI Chief LeCun Reflects on the Impact of ChatGPT and Meta’s Open Source Mission

Credit: DepositPhotos

Furthermore, the judge discussed the plaintiff’s argument that the volume and regularity of similar incidents, along with public statements from the Department of Homeland Security, demonstrated an institutional policy or pattern of allowing border patrol agents to cut or move the fence without exigent circumstances.

The preliminary arguments also raised the question of whether an alien who is detained shortly after unlawful entry can be considered to have “effected an entry.”

The judge pointed out that historically, federal officials have attempted to turn migrants back into Mexico, contradicting the federal government’s stance that migrants must be processed for asylum once they set foot on U.S. soil.

As of now, a trial date for the case has not been determined.

Read Next: Republicans Criticize Biden’s Broadband Policy at FCC Oversight Hearing

mm

Malik is a skilled writer with a passion for news and current events. With their keen eye for detail, they provide insightful perspectives on the latest happenings. Stay informed and engaged!