Most Americans believe that the crisis at the southern border caused by President Joe Biden is an invasion, but federal judges don’t share such an opinion.
For months, Republicans have labeled the southern border crisis as an “invasion.” Such claims have fallen flat in courts, where judges argue that the pouring of illegal immigrants and drugs into the U.S. appears less like an unconstitutional military incursion and more like the kinds of border issues that America has faced for decades.
I could not support the foreign aid bill since it gave money to Gaza and did nothing to stop the invasion Joe Biden has allowed on our southern border.
We had an opportunity to vote for a clean bill granting emergency aid to Israel months ago—Senate Democrats voted no. pic.twitter.com/Awa0EaP2ce
— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) April 25, 2024
In the Constitution, it is said that states have the freedom of action to protect their borders. Texas is currently in the midst of a legal battle against the Biden administration, which tried to prevent state authorities from acting to mitigate illegal immigration.
Individuals who support the idea of calling the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border an invasion cite the record numbers of illegal immigrants and fentanyl detected at the border, arguing that this triggers the Constitution’s invasion clause, allowing states to act to defend themselves.
Despite their arguments, judges have not been receptive.
Judge David Alan Ezra recently said that James Madison and other founding fathers would not have classified the chaos at the southern border as a state being “actually invaded.”
“Texas’s new interpretation of its power to protect itself against alleged invasions goes far beyond the original and natural meaning of ‘invasion’ and incurably exceeds the power granted to the states by our Founding Fathers,” Ezra wrote.
The Washington Times reported that the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has paid little attention to the invasion argument as judges deal with Texas’ efforts to do what the Biden administration refuses: secure the border.
One of the major proponents of the invasion argument, Ken Cuccinelli, said he expects better results as cases reach other courts.
“I trust that when more open-minded judges who are more respectful of the actual words of the Constitution get this case, you will see more respect from the courts for Texas’ continuing right to defend itself against the invasion taking place across the Mexican border,” Cuccinelli told the Washington Times.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Editor
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://thecongressionalinsider.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.