By Tyler Durden | 1 May 2022
ZERO HEDGE — Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) is considering invoking war powers to expand the state’s authority to manage the southern border by officially declaring an “invasion” – verbiage which would comply with a clause in the US Constitution that says states are prohibited from engaging in war except when “actually invaded.”
Top lawyers for Mr. Abbott and for the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, met this month to debate the move, which would put the state in a head-on collision with the federal government by allowing state police to arrest and deport migrants, according to two people familiar with the discussions. Mr. Abbott says he remains open to the approach, but he has expressed concern about unintended consequences. -NYT
“If we do use this strategy, it could expose law enforcement in the state of Texas to being prosecuted,” said Abbott during a recent press converence. “Is it something we’re looking into? Yes,” he added.
Abbott has already mobilized thousands of National Guard troops to patrol the border, and ordered safety inspections of incoming trucks from Mexico – a short-lived program after it caused massive gridlock and disrupted international trade. He’s also overseen the construction of around 20 miles of new border fencing at key ares. What’s more, Abbott repurposed several state prisons to hold migrants charged with trespassing. […]
More conservatard idiocy, rhetorical red meat for their low info voters and supporters.
The vast majority of these people are applying for asylum; the tactic of applying for asylum en masse, aided by NGOs, started with the ‘caravans’ during the Trump administration — of course nearly all these claims are bogus, and should be rejected: poverty or an (over-)abundance of ordinary criminality can never be allowed as grounds for asylum, which used to be called political asylum, emphasizing that, as envisioned by the 1951 refugee treaty, it was designed to offer protection to those with a legitimate fear of persecution, e.g. Jews in the Third Reich.
The US is a signatory of the 1951 refugee treaty, and as such is legally obligated to give due consideration to all applications for asylum — failure to do this will lead to lawsuits (e.g. by NGOs), and these lawsuits will succeed — there is vast national and international asylum law precedent, and the Biden administration has considerable leeway in how it handles these people while their applications are being processed (e.g. the migrant flights).
Within this existing legal framework, the only way to handle the asylum problem at the southern border is for the US to force Mexico to sign a ‘safe third country’ agreement, as already exists with Canada (link) — with such an agreement in place, the US could legally turn away anyone seeking asylum at the southern border, telling them to apply in Mexico — the US has plenty of economic leverage to force Mexico to sign, but the incompetent Trump administration failed to make that happen.
Abbott’s Operation Lone Star has already been dealt a legal setback:
Austin judge tosses migrant’s trespassing charge, a blow to Gov. Abbott’s border enforcement plan
(Looking up the NGO responsible for this suit is left as an exercise.)
Any measure that treats asylum-seekers as illegal migrants, and interferes in any way with their ability to apply for asylum, is destined for a similar fate.