Border States Need To Override Biden And Secure Their Own Borders

when a political figure or party takes unilateral action against the entire country, it is not only the states right, but their obligation to ignore and nullify it.

we're a democratic republic; the power of the country/union resides in state rights, not a centralized federal government, many seem to have forgotten that fact...

unless we see some drastic changes and accountability in the coming mid-terms, I suspect we'll see more state nullification laws coming, especially on the issues of 2nd Amendment rights and border security

Texas is doing that

Why not- it was done for Covid, wasn’t it? States effectively took it upon themselves to deal with that “ crisis” as their border(s) We have an illegal population “ crisis”, and let the states deal with it as they deem appropriate.

I recognize that your major point seems to be State sovereignty and the right of the States to police international borders, but that right is being litigated and I think the courts are to place to decide the issue.

In fact, as a result of ligation by the States, the Biden Aministrat is still enforcing Title 42, a Trump policy which the CBP has acknowledged has had the unintended effect of increasing border crossings.



https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-releases-april-2022-monthly-operational-update?language_content_entity=en

If the federal gov't won't step up, it forces the border states to take action, even though it's a national issue. But will a deeply blue state like California do anything, or New Mexico?

In case anyone actually cares to look in the legal issues behind the idea of the states "overriding" Biden to protect their borders, as opposed to just rabble rousing and threatening timely secession talk, I figured I'd offer a couple of interesting results from quick google search.

The first is Ken Cucinelli (remember him, the former " the Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security" from 2019 to 2021), which, to be honest, reads a lot like the writings of John C. Calhoun:

https://americarenewing.com/issues/policy-brief-how-states-can-secure-the-border/

The second is what appears to be a fairly bland, but decidedly non-Trumpist (its from 2004) view of the law regarding the Federal power to regulate emigration, including a few choice squibs on attempts from States to interfere with this implied power.

http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/immigrationlaw/chapter2.html

I'm not getting paid for this research or analysis, so I'm going to be lazy and not go much deeper, especially in response to a post like this one, but I'll offer this thought.

The federal power over immigration seems to be not much more express in the constitution than the right of privacy or any other non-expressly granted rights, like the endangered "rights of women over their own bodies" set forth in Roe. It would require some real legal gymnastics to overrule all the "precedent" talked about in the second link, but from an originalist perspective, its not really that much harder than what happened with Heller to reject all the prior decisions as dicta or inconsistent with the text of the Constitution, since there's precious little on the subject actually in the text aside from "naturalization" which is obviously distinguishable from immigration.

While I don't think OP actually thought much about or cared about the legal basis for, or even the implications of a full scale State rebellion by force against the Biden Administration on the issue of immigration, and tend to think he's just rabble rousing in advance of an uncomfortable spectacle by the Democrats about 1/6, its worth noting that this "Originalist" Supreme Court could fairly easily point out that that the Tenth Amendment reserves all powers not expressly granted to the Federal Government to the States or the People, and thus de-legitimatize any federal action against States that interfere with existing Federal border or immigration policy.

Another caravan is on the way. Mexico is not even TRYING to stop them. 9500 people.

Texas is already trying to handle it on their own.

Encounters. Most of those people are turned away.
Get a grip bud.
There is no invasion.
Hey...didnt trump say he built his beautiful wall? Shouldnt that be keeping that imagined invasion at bay?

An invasion?.

Spot on, dude

It's like the White Walkers descending on Winterfell with their zombie ice dragon.

Sadly we will never recover completely.

To pay them back hes supplying baby formula., doubt they'll change

That is vigilantism.
Lawless violent defense against an enemy,-. They picked foreigners, illegally.

and they were props!
plain and simple

send for Kyle