BREAKING! Supreme Court Emergency Decision Used For Immediate Nationwide Block of Border Crisis Rule

Added: 2026-05-24

[00:00:00]So, the battle over border security just got even more complicated after the Supreme Court issued an emergency order.

[00:00:06]The Fifth Circuit has now issued a critical decision in this case, likely teeing up this issue to once again return back to the Supreme Court. So, let's break down what just happened.

[00:00:17]Now, before we jump into this video, if you want to support the channel, one of the best ways to do that is simply by subscribing. You can also hit the like button. That just tells the algorithm that you appreciate this content and so it shares it with more people. I also want to thank one of the main supporters of this channel, which is Attorneys on Retainer. When it comes to self-defense protection, in my opinion, AO is in a league of their own. They're backed by an actual law firm, the Attorneys for Freedom, and they're always trying to expand upon their benefits to give you as much as possible as a member. And right now, if you want to sign up, if you want to check them out, you can do so using the links down below. And if you decide to sign up and you use my code ARMS scholar, you can get $50 off of your individual signup fee or $25 off of the family signup fee. Now, as I mentioned in the intro, we need to talk about the Texas border dispute and the state's SB4 law, which was originally challenged by the Biden administration, but now there have been some significant developments. As I've covered before, Texas SB4 is the state border security law that effectively makes it a state crime for someone to illegally enter into Texas from outside of the United States at a place other than a lawful point of entry. The law also creates a separate offense for illegal re-entry from someone who has previously been removed, denied admission, deported, or excluded from the United States. And finally, the law allows Texas judges to issue orders requiring certain individuals to return to the foreign nation from which they entered or attempted to enter. This law was originally challenged by the Biden administration when it was passed by the state of Texas along with immigration advocacy organizations in El Paso County. A federal district court on review issued a preliminary injunction in favor of those plaintiffs and they blocked SB4 and they found that the law was likely preempted by federal immigration laws. The state of Texas then appealed up to the fifth circuit and the case went through a long procedural fight including emergency proceedings that actually went all the way to the Supreme Court and later there was review by the full fifth circuit on bonk panel. But then things changed again when President Trump took office.

[00:02:21]As you may be aware, of course, Trump took a different approach when it came to border security. And the Trump administration began taking a very different position on border security, including executive actions, essentially recognizing the southern border crisis as an invasion and asking the fifth circuit for additional time to reassess the federal government's current position in this very case. Because of that, eventually the United States dismissed its own claims and actually withdrew from this lawsuit. So they pulled their support from this challenge that left the nonprofit plaintiffs in El Paso County as the only remaining challengers to Texas's SB4 law. And that is where this new fifth circuit opinion becomes extremely important. The fifth circuit on panel on review just issued a new decision in this case against the remaining plaintiffs effectively allowing SP4 to remain in place. So this is significant because the fifth circuit on panel ruled in favor of the state of Texas ruled in favor of SB4 removed the injunction against it and potentially Texas can now put in place those SB4 laws. Now in this ruling the fifth circuit did not say that SB4 is constitutional on the merits. The fifth circuit also did not say that Texas definitely wins the preeemption issue.

[00:03:33]Instead the court said that the remaining plaintiffs challenging this law do not have article 3 standing to bring a lawsuit. Now, that matters because standing is a threshold requirement for these types of challenges. Before a federal court can decide whether a law is valid or invalid, the plaintiff has to show a concrete injury that is fairly traceable to the defendant and likely to be fixed by the court. Here, the majority of the fifth circuit said that the nonprofit plaintiffs could not create standing simply by saying that SP4 would force them to spend money, adjust their resources, or change how they provide legal services. The court relied heavily on recent Supreme Court standing cases and precedents essentially to say that the organizations cannot spend their way into standing and they cannot do so and voluntarily incur costs to essentially drum up standing and bring this type of challenge. The court also rejected El Paso County standing theory. So they rolled against the other plaintiff as well. El Paso County argued that SB4 would damage public trust and impose costs on the county. But the fifth circuit said that those theories were too speculative uh especially because this was a pre-inforcement challenge and no one yet knew exactly how SB4 would be enforced in practice and what effect that would really have on the county. So the bottom line for the majority of the fifth circuit on bonk panel was very simply they said that there was no standing and therefore no injunction should be in place and so they reversed the lower court ruling and because the plaintiffs lacked standing the fifth circuit vacated the preliminary injunction without reaching the broader merits of whether SB4 is preempted by federal law. That makes this ruling a major win for the state of Texas. The lower court's injunction had blocked SB4 prior and it prevented it from ever going into effect. But now the fifth circuit on panel has wiped that out.

[00:05:21]They took away that injunction. And so there is the opportunity for Texas to use SB4 going forward. But the reason this is also so important is that the ruling also narrows who can challenge these types of state border laws and issues going forward. The court is basically saying that advocacy groups and local governments cannot automatically run to federal courts and block a state law just because they disagree with that law just because they oppose it or they claim that they will spend money trying to respond to it.

[00:05:50]That standing issue could also become extremely important not only in this case but also in other lawsuits challenging similar types of state laws.

[00:05:58]And remember this is not just about Texas. Other states have passed or considered similar types of laws and the eth circuit has also been dealing with a very similar challenge to Iowa's uh SB4 style immigration law that's currently as well pending I believe as well. Now in the decision there were also some major concurring opinions from various judges. You had Judge Hoe who agreed that the plaintiffs lack standing but he went further and actually discussed Texas's border invasion theory in SB4.

[00:06:27]His view is that when a state claims it is responding to an invasion, that is a kind of war power or sovereignty issue that courts should be extremely hesitant to actually seconduess. That does not mean that every judge actually agreed with that opinion and it was not the controlling holding in this case, but it's interesting to see that you had some, you know, kind of blocks of judges also believe that Texas would win this case on the merits. You also had judge also write a concurrence and he emphasized that the plaintiffs were nowhere close to establishing standing but maybe that different plaintiffs could show standing but here he said that the remaining plaintiffs were so far off and that's why they ruled against them. Now there were also of course dissents in this opinion which strongly disagreed with the position of the majority. The dissenters argued that at least one of the plaintiffs lost Americas uh did have standing because SB4 directly interfered with their legal services and their work. They also argued that SB4 is preempted by federal immigration laws and that Texas cannot create its own parallel immigration enforcement system and that's why they disagreed with SB4. In the descent view, this case should have actually gone to the merits and the injunction should have been allowed to move forward and remain in place. So this was not a minor technical disagreement between the majority and the denters. This was a major split over both standing and also the broader role that states can play in immigration enforcement. Now the big question is what happens now going forward after this fifth circuit ruling because the fifth circuit vacated the preliminary injunction and Texas has a major opening to argue that SB4 can now be enforced. But I would expect that the challengers here or the remaining plaintiffs will actually seek emergency Supreme Court relief and possibly again like I mentioned go back to the Supreme Court on this issue. And that means that this case may not be over just yet. In fact, the ruling may set up the next major Supreme Court fight over state immigration enforcement, standing, preeemption, and border issues as well.

[00:08:23]So, the key takeaway from this ruling is that Texas just won a major ruling in the fifth circuit. The injunction blocking SB4 has actually been vacated, but the fifth circuit did not fully resolve the merits of whether SB4 actually conflicts with federal immigration laws. Instead, the court said that the remaining plaintiffs actually lack standing to bring this challenge. That means that the legal fight over SB4 and this Texas border security issue is likely far from over and like I mentioned likely will go back to the Supreme Court. So, as this unravels, as we get more information, I will let you guys know. If you like this video and you would like to support the channel, one of the best ways to do that is simply to like, comment, and subscribe. All of those things help to fuel the algorithm and just tells the algorithm that you appreciate this content and so it shares it with more people. But as always, thank you so much for all of your support and never forget this nation was built by armed scholars and this nation will be maintained by armed scholars.