The Supreme Court’s border failure

.

The U.S. Supreme Court vacated a lower court order Monday that prohibited United States Border Patrol agents from destroying barbed wire owned by the state of Texas on the U.S.-Mexico border. It was a stunning decision that calls into question the sovereign rights of states.

The ruling was 5-4, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining with the three liberal justices to rule in favor of the Biden administration.

The ruling means that Texas, which is one of the few states in the U.S. that borders another country, cannot take on any responsibility for its own border security, despite the fact that the state’s infrastructure is forced to shoulder the heavy burden of responding to the waves of illegal immigrants that cross the border on a daily basis.

The case arose after the state sued the Biden administration for destroying the barbed wire fence barriers, thus clearing the way for more migrants to cross the border. By ruling with the Biden administration, the order means that Texas has absolutely no real recourse to secure the border on its own and must rely on the federal government.

The crisis at the border poses a real and existential threat to the security of the people of Texas, and the U.S. Constitution specifically affords states the ability to respond to external threats without waiting for Congress to act. This is what Texas has been doing, securing the border for the security of the citizens of Texas.

But perhaps the most disheartening part of the court’s ruling is the fact that two Republican-appointed justices joined with the liberal minority to deny Texas the ability to secure the southern border.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

More than anything, the outcome of this case shows how even a justice like Amy Coney Barrett — who was hyped as a deeply religious social conservative on her way to the highest court in the land — can still fail to live up to the expectations of how a conservative judge should rule.

This ruling should serve as a lesson for the next conservative president as they make judicial nominations. Future judges should be molded after Justices Clarence Thomas or Samuel Alito, not Roberts or Barrett.

Related Content