On April 26th, a federal judge ruled that the Biden administration could proceed with a lawsuit against Texas over the installation of a 1,000-foot-long floating barrier in the Rio Grande river, designed to deter illegal border crossings from Mexico.
U.S. District Judge David Ezra in Austin determined that the Department of Justice’s claim that the barrier violated federal law by obstructing navigable waterways was plausible enough to warrant further legal proceedings.
Judge Ezra had previously ordered Texas to remove the barrier pending the outcome of the case, stating that it likely contravened federal law.
US President Biden (Credits: WFXR)
Although a panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Ezra’s ruling, the full court is now reviewing that decision, with arguments scheduled for May 15th.
Ezra reaffirmed his previous ruling, emphasizing that the Justice Department provided evidence, including photographs, to support its argument that the stationary barrier could impede vessel passage, thereby reducing the waterway’s navigability.
However, Ezra dismissed a separate claim in the Biden administration‘s lawsuit regarding the violation of an 1848 treaty between the U.S. and Mexico, which mandates mutual agreement before constructing obstructions in the Rio Grande.
Neither Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton nor Governor Greg Abbott, both Republicans who have criticized the Biden administration’s border policies, responded to requests for comment.
President Biden (Credits: Spectrum News)
The floating barrier is part of Texas’s response to a surge in illegal border crossings last year and what officials perceive as President Biden’s inadequate handling of the issue.
In addition to the barrier, Texas has transported migrants to Democratic-led states, erected razor-wire fencing along the border, and passed legislation permitting the prosecution of individuals present in the state illegally.
These measures have sparked legal disputes with the Biden administration and advocacy groups, who argue that Texas is interfering with the federal government’s authority to enforce immigration laws and migrants’ rights to seek humanitarian assistance.
