As we enter the dog days of summer, we are greeted by new extremist challenges to immigrant-inclusive policies—and a new trend: the addition of private plaintiffs to State/local government-led lawsuits challenging federal immigration policy (presumably to compensate for their own lack of standing post-USA v. Texas). See below and our microsite for recent developments.
District court dismisses Texas’s challenge to CBP One for lack of standing
Earlier this month, Chief Judge Moses of the Western District of Texas dismissed Texas’s lawsuit over the narrow exception to Biden’s “Circumvention of Lawful Pathways” asylum ban, which allows asylum seekers able to schedule an appointment through the CBP One app to come to the border and present their claim for humanitarian relief (a right guaranteed them by U.S. law without an appointment). Chief Judge Moses held that Texas failed to prove that it is injured by the asylum ban or its exception and, therefore, lacks standing under the Supreme Court’s June 2023 USA v. Texas decision.
That’s Texas’s third immigration policy-related case dismissed since USA v. Texas for lack of standing (with its challenges to Alternatives to Detention funding and the CHNV parole program being the first two), and fourth such red state case (with the 19-state Louisiana-led challenge to a regulation about asylum officers being the other). The only outlier thus far is Judge Kacsmaryk’s refusal (twice) to dismiss Texas’s challenge to that same asylum officer regulation.
19 states seek preliminary injunction of Department of Labor protections for guest workers
In June, 19 states (led by Kansas), a farm, and an agricultural trade organization sued in the Southern District of Georgia to challenge a Department of Labor regulation that modestly improves working conditions for H-2A agricultural guest workers. Last Friday, Judge Wood held a hearing on the states’ request to preliminarily enjoin (block) the regulation while the case proceeds to final judgment. The regulation applies to applications to participate in the H-2A program filed on or after August 29, and Judge Wood seems likely to rule before that date.
A Texas sheriff, two counties, and a veterinarian file weird lawsuit about all the things
Last week, a doozy of a lawsuit was filed (in Texas, of course) by a Washington D.C.-based anti-immigrant nonprofit on behalf of one Texas sheriff, his county (pop. 3,149) and one other, and a veterinarian who owns a ranch 70 miles from the border. In addition to challenging four family reunification parole programs created last summer for certain nationals of Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, their lawsuit challenges the CHNV parole program, border wall spending, the end of Remain in Mexico, and even more (including things the sheriff and his county already sued over and lost).
As always, we’ll keep you posted on these and other cases.
Thanks for reading,
Esther Sung
Legal Director
