Affirms states' rights to defend against invasion, citing the influx of cartels and criminal elements across the southern border and criticizing the Biden administration's border security policies.
Jodey Arrington
Representative
TX-19
This bill asserts the constitutional right of states to defend themselves against invasion, citing the situation at the southern border from 2021-2024 as an invasion by cartels, terrorists, and criminal elements. It criticizes the Biden administration's border policies and claims the federal government failed to protect southern border states, thus empowering states to take defensive action.
Border States Greenlit to 'Repel Invasion': Bill Cites Constitution Amidst Claims of Federal Failure
This bill drops a constitutional bomb, citing Article I, Section 10, to declare that states have the sovereign power to "repel an invasion" and defend their citizens. It's directly aimed at what it calls the "imminent danger" from cartels, terrorists, and criminals who've supposedly "seized control" of the southern border. Let's break down what that really means.
States' Rights to... Expel Everyone?
The core claim here is wild: every state has the right to exclude anyone who does not have the right to be there. (Section 2). That's a very broad statement. The bill then specifically points to Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California as being "invaded" or in "imminent danger" from 2021-2024, giving them the green light, in the bill's view, to take action. (Section 2). No messing around. The bill goes so far as to say the federal government, and the Biden administration specifically, failed to protect those states. (Sections 3 & 4).
The 'Failure' of Federal Border Policy
The bill paints a grim picture of the Biden administration's border policies from 2021-2024. It slams the administration for removing "effective border security measures" and putting in place policies that, it claims, encourage illegal immigration. The bill highlights record-high monthly apprehensions (over 200,000), the billions spent by border states on services for migrants, and the presence of individuals from over 160 countries, including some on terrorist watch lists. It also points to increases in crimes by undocumented immigrants, including sex offenses, and huge fentanyl seizures.
Real-World (and Alarming) Implications
If this bill's interpretation holds, it could mean states taking immigration enforcement into their own hands, potentially bypassing federal laws and processes. Think: state-level raids, checkpoints, and detentions. For a regular person, this could mean increased scrutiny based on appearance or perceived status, especially in border states. For businesses, it could lead to labor shortages and a climate of uncertainty. The bill uses the word "invasion," which is extreme language. That term could be used to justify some pretty drastic measures, and it raises serious questions about due process and potential discrimination. The bill also specifically states that migrant women and children have been "abused, raped, tortured, enslaved, and trafficked" due to an unsecure border. It's a dangerous, slippery slope.
Bigger Picture: Federal vs. State Power
This bill taps into a long-running tension: states' rights versus federal authority, especially on immigration. It's essentially saying that if the federal government isn't doing its job (in the bill's view), states can step in and do whatever they deem necessary. While the bill focuses on border security, the precedent it could set is much broader. It's a challenge to the very idea of who gets to decide immigration policy in this country. The challenges this bill presents are pretty clear: It could create a patchwork of immigration enforcement across the country, lead to legal challenges, and potentially fuel a lot of fear and division.