| Litigants: | United States v. Texas |
| Arguedate: | November 29 |
| Argueyear: | 2022 |
| Decidedate: | June 23 |
| Decideyear: | 2023 |
| Fullname: | United States, et al. v. Texas, et al. |
| Usvol: | 599 |
| Uspage: | 670 |
| Parallelcitations: | 143 S. Ct. 1964 |
| Docket: | 22-58 |
| Oralargument: | https://www.oyez.org/cases/2022/22-58 |
| Opinionannouncement: | https://www.oyez.org/cases/2022/22-58 |
| Holding: | Texas and Louisiana lack Article III standing to challenge the Guidelines. |
| Majority: | Kavanaugh |
| Joinmajority: | Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Jackson |
| Concurrence: | Gorsuch (in judgment) |
| Joinconcurrence: | Thomas, Barrett |
| Concurrence2: | Barrett (in judgment) |
| Joinconcurrence2: | Gorsuch |
| Dissent: | Alito |
| Questionspresented: | (1) Whether the state plaintiffs have Article III standing to challenge the Department of Homeland Security's Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law; and (2) Whether the Guidelines are contrary to or, or otherwise violate the Administrative Procedure Act; and (3) Whether prevents the entry of an order to "hold unlawful and set aside" the Guidelines under . |
United States v. Texas, 599 U.S. 670 (2023), was a United States Supreme Court case related to federal immigration law.
Many of the Biden administration's immigration policies have been subject to protracted litigation. Shortly after taking office in January 2021, the administration directed the U.S. immigration agency, ICE, to stop all deportations except those that posed a threat to "national security, public safety, and border security". The act was widely expected to reduce the number of deportations by the agency. Texas filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas soon after, and Judge Drew B. Tipton issued a temporary restraining order. The state soon dismissed the lawsuit, but filed a new suit with Louisiana in April 2021 after the administration issued modified interim guidance in February. Judge Tipton then issued a preliminary injunction in August 2021. The government appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which stayed the injunction in part in September. In November, the 5th Circuit, sitting en banc, vacated the panel opinion. That appeal became moot as the administration had issued a final guidance document in September.[1]
The court held a bench trial in February 2022 about the legality of the final guidance. On June 10, 2022, the court held the final guidance violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and vacated it. On July 6, 2022, a panel of the Fifth Circuit denied a stay pending appeal, holding the Supreme Court's intervening decision in Garland v. Gonzalez did not deprive the district court of jurisdiction over the suit.[2]
Arizona, Montana, and Ohio separately challenged the permanent guidance in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. On March 22, 2022, Judge Michael J. Newman issued a preliminary injunction against the guidance, which the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit stayed on April 12, 2022, and reversed on July 5, 2022.
After the 5th Circuit denied a stay pending appeal, the federal government sought a stay from the Supreme Court on July 8, 2022. On July 21, 2022, the court denied the application for stay in a 5–4 vote, but granted certiorari before judgment and set the case for argument in the December sitting. Oral arguments were held on November 29, 2022. On June 23, 2023, the Supreme Court reversed the district court in an 8–1 decision.[3]