The Department of Homeland Security had directed the state to stop blocking the U.S. Border Patrol’s access to roughly 2½ miles of the U.S.-Mexico border
Texas is refusing to comply with a cease-and-desist letter from the Biden administration over actions by the state that have impeded U.S. Border Patrol agents from accessing part of the border with Mexico.
In a letter to the Department of Homeland Security, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton rejected the Biden administration’s request for the state to “cease and desist” its takeover of Shelby Park, an epicenter of southwest border illegal immigration in Eagle Pass.
“Because the facts and law side with Texas, the State will continue utilizing its constitutional authority to defend her territory, and I will continue defending those lawful efforts in court,” Paxton wrote.
Because the facts and law side with Texas
Lol no they don’t. Paxton knows that. Federal agents always have jurisdiction over the border
Right, I mean, literally the federal government could claim 200 miles from the border in Texas and the only thing that could stop them is a bad interpretation of the law by the Supreme Court. Which probably puts it within the realm of possibility, to be honest.
Just send in an 18 year old kid with a gun, those Texans will be petrified with fear and won’t even be able to respond. Or does that only work when it’s at a school?
Just designate the area as an “open air campus” and then you’re good to go.
I’m frustrated at myself for laughing as hard as I did
I mean, they are occupying a section of the border of the entire country, and denying, through threat of violence, the federal government/military access to said border. At some point, this simply has to be read as insurrection, and put down. A country only gets to exist and enforce laws by virtue of the implied violence (physical or otherwise) that it can leverage to back it up.
Of course there are complications to this, like the thought that steamrolling these troopers would then spark a greater revolt. But when you have a state doing things like this, particularly a state that has made it abundantly clear they desire to secede and have prepared for secession, I think you need to play hardball. This could be either by forcibly bringing them back in line through state violence, or giving them what they want, in such a way that it ends up being a pyrrhic victory; imagine aggressive border protocols and removal of free travel along the Texas border, intense tariffs and duties on Texan goods, etc… honestly a Texit could be quite beneficial for the country, shifting congress balances somewhat. Add in some statehood’s for PR, Guam and DC and now you’re really cooking with gas.
Who knows though, I’m still finding it hard to believe that the Jan 6 insurrectionists weren’t mowed down in machine gun fire when they penetrated the capitol, so clearly my expectations of government reaction and what actually happens have some daylight between them.
I think having the FBI arrest the leadership is a better approach than troops killing each other.
Yeah I mean that’s fine, but you’d run the same risk there with bluff-calling and standoffs. Like clearly Texas is trying to bait the feds into either rolling over for a cheap win, or doing something that they might be able to use to spark something more significant. Not sure which is worse, but I know which one will look more weak/will incite further escalators acts on Texas’ part.
So the larger issue is that Republicans will continue pushing the goalposts until eventually a drastic action has to be taken. Better now, I think.
Basically exactly what I think also—it’s not an activity that just stops at some arbitrary point, it’s a power negotiation. They’ll push it as far as they can.
particularly a state that has made it abundantly clear they desire to secede and have prepared for secession
The state GOP rejected the petition to even add secession on their primary ballot, and the state Supreme Court declined to take up the pro-secession group’s request to intervene.
So it’s not really accurate to broadly paint the entire state as frothing at the mouth to secede. We have a sizeable number of idiots who do, but it’s objective not part of the Republican state party platform, much less the general population supporting it.
I mean I’m sure plenty of Texans have no desire to succeed. But there are multiple real actions that suggest the state has it in mind: separate border enforcement forces, isolated power grid, the Texas rangers/trooper or whatever they’re called. It may all just be maneuvering/bluster, but when you see the state power structures trying to create Amon Bundy-standoffs it does make one wonder.
There also nascent secession movements elsewhere, California has a visible one.
Nah, the politicians and the populace would gain nothing by seceding. The Republicans are trying to push extreme “state’s rights” on all fronts. The goal of this particular fiasco is likely to get a favorable outcome from SCOTUS and to prevent Texas from getting more blue/brown from immigrants’ children. The goal of extreme “state’s rights” is to ensure Republican control over the federal government (there are more red states than blue states, and if states have enough rights to do things like overriding election results, voter suppression, extreme gerrymandering, and other various ways of “rigging” elections, Republicans can ensure control over both state and federal government).
Look I agree—I doubt very much they have a real intention of seceding—it would be a shitshow—but they do do things to float the spectre of secession. But I agree it’s about extreme states rights, and leading by example, since among the red states, Texas has the largest GDP after California in country (or perhaps they’re more now, not sure depending on gas/oil stuff)
The gdp thing is the same reason that there is a marginal Californian secession movement.
Abbott does have a history of trotting out the national guard to keep the US military in place. If you don’t remember, look up the Jade Helm Scare. A Russian propaganda farm pushed the idea on social media that Obama was going to take TX citizens prisoner in abandoned Walmarts that were converted to holding centers and do something with them. Abbott was so convinced this could happen, that he ordered the national guard to watch the military training g exercise nicknamed Jade Helm.
I remember that. Such a weird and excellent name for a loony military operation.
What’s the issue? Get a ton of federal agents, march on the border, arrest all obstructing Texas shitheads and beat them down with the book. Make examples out of them.
That will likely result in bloodshed. I think it’s inevitable at this point unless Biden decides to completely roll over.
There’s not going to be any bloodshed. Texas National Guard soldiers want to go home safely every night, just like everyone else. I think the main issue is the border patrol doesn’t want a conflict.
Biden could nationalize the Texas Guard troops at the fence. Then give them a direct order to open the gate. If they don’t, dishonorable discharge for disobeying a direct order from the President. No pension, no nothing. They will open the gate.
What happens after that? Does he de-nationalize them once the issue is sorted, or has Texas now lost full control permanently?
edit: I seem to have hit some nerve with a legitimate question? 7 downvotes??? I don’t know how biden nationalizing the state guard works and what happens after.
I would argue that Texas has already done enough to be stripped of control permanently.
Same policy as with Southern states after the Civil War.
The reason people are downvoting you is because your question is “So what does Biden do with his authority after exercising his authority? Not exercise it more or exercise it forever?”
You think you have a gotcha, but really you just sound ignorant and angry.
WTF? There’s no gotcha there.
I seriously have no idea what happens after he does it. There’s 0 anger in my question just trying to understand what it actually means.
It solves the immediate problem, but whats the aftermath.
Edit: And please do tell what kind of options beside eventually giving control back, or keeping control exist? I seriously don’t know.
The National Guard is the “militia” that you hear about in the Constitution and such. Basically militias were brought up during the Revolutionary War and are what actually fought most of the battles. Those people wanted to ensure that militias would always be a thing so that in the future, oppression wouldn’t occur.
In normal times, a governor is the head of a militia. But ultimately, the militias are part of the US military and always under the president. There are going to be laws and situations that Congress has spelled out over the years that say when this can or cannot happen, for how long it can last, etc.
In brief: during an emergency, the president or governor calls up the reservists. Think natural disasters and such. When the emergency is over, they go back home and back to their normal jobs.
This doesn’t seem the same though?
In this case it’s the state national guard interfering with federal business. They themselves are the emergency.
If he nationalizes them to resolve the situation (letting the border guard patrol the area) the moment he ends his control, Texas would just start up the interference again?
Is the outcome that he nationalizes it, and they remain under his control until a federal court orders Texas to comply, at which point he returns control to Texas?
The same thing happens as with desegregation. The national guard eventually goes home as the operation is considered complete. Sure the governor could reactivate them and try to understand everything, but that’s not really realistic.
We already handled the “what are you going to do if we don’t follow the law” question here once, they must have just taken that part out of their history books.
I’m fine with bloodshed. SWAT the fuckers in their beds.
Read the wiki article on the standoff in Waco, TX, which happened under Clinton. It would be a larger version of that.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
The only thing Ken Paxton should be defending in court is himself for securities fraud.
In a letter to the Department of Homeland Security, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton rejected the Biden administration’s request for the state to “cease and desist”
WTF? A cease and desist is a demand, not a “request!”
That’s not even quoting Texas’ fascist AG or anything; that’s the article writers’ own spin. Why are Julia Ainsley and Zoë Richards carrying water for fascists?
Their editors told them it makes more money, I’d guess.
Could you elaborate on the distinction between demand and request?
A request is optional. A demand is not.
I guess I get what you’re saying. You’re saying that it’s irrelevant what the requester/demander calls it, what makes the distinction is whether or not there are stated consequences beyond the displeasure of the requester/demander.
Paxton was trying to change the narrative here, but it didn’t work. He’s trying to reframe it so that he feels better about it.
LOL governments don’t ask you to pretty please not speed, the demand that you don’t. Get it?
Just arrest all these fuckers, starting with the Texas Governor.
The governor sucks but please start with Paxton.
Invite them both to the White House. Then arrest them at the same time
Revoke all federal funding until they comply
Use their federal funding to forcibly remove them and place them in prison. Governance of national borders is not and should not be contingent on the presumed compliance of some malicious shitheads.
fund THIS
For fuck’s sake, arrest these nimrods. At gunpoint, because God knows they aren’t fucking cooperative.
“Now stop it or we’ll send another sternly-worded letter!”
Arrest the guy for obstructing federal agencies. Then send another strongly worded letter to everyone else.
If they still refuse… arrest them too.
That would be nice, wouldn’t it?
Just start the civil war already, jeeze.
OR Texas can pull it’s head out of its own asshole.
It’s a long shot, I know.
I won’t hold my breath lol.
Texas sure is lol
They’ve had their heads up their ass for so long that they think their farts are a lovely breeze of fresh air. Now they’re permanently grown into that position; like how your mom said if you tug at your face it’ll stay that way…
Removed by mod
Nah, that’s not how we do things in a civilized society.
Right, we just wait until they invite a civil war, lose, and kill themselves when they realize they can’t win, meanwhile countless others suffer during the whole thing. Sounds great.
Jesus Christ thank you. Some of the suggestions here are terrifying.
People who say violence is never the answer are literally the first people to be executed when violence comes to town.
How did we solve world war 2? A monopoly on violence.
How did we solve world war 2?
Let the Russians deal with it?
It is difficult to imagine how enforcing constitutionally-enshrined federal law will spark a civil war.
Unless you mean these assholes are traitors. At which point it becomes even more important to enforce the rule of law and yeet them out of government.
You really don’t want that. You might not realise it now, but even if we win, those of us left will gaze at the ashes under which we buried our friends and family, and wish it hadn’t happened.
Fuck it, Texas deserves to be ash then.
Rip the bandage off and get to recovery and repair faster. We’re just slowly decaying and collapsing into fascism right now.
That’s the thing about war: it’s not easy to contain it or direct it once it’s gotten going. It’s messy. It will kill people you care about. It will probably kill you. Downvote away, but war is hell and by the time you all realise I’m right about that it’ll be way too fucking late.
Who says it should be contained? I simply said “Texas deserves to be ash then” - the fallout is acceptable.
We all have to die of something. The fear of death from the left is keeping us from confronting the right wing as needed - they don’t fear death because they have a Heaven or Rapture to save them. Stop worrying about death and face the fascists on their level, or they will dominate by dictating the tempo of action.
Trump is proving that much right now. He has a stronger support base than ever before - because he espouses violent and aggressive rhetoric. Just lean into it and let the cards (or bodies) fall where they may. America likes it that way, it seems.
Well, you said Texas can be ash, as though it would just affect Texas.
And stop straw manning my point. I’m not talking about fear of death. My point is that war is fucking awful. There is NOTHING about it to look forward to, or cheer for, or admire, and there is NO REASON to want it to happen.
You think Palestinians or Israelis are reveling in the glory of war right now? Ukrainians, or Russians who’ve lost loved ones on the front? Idiocy. Nobody should want that shit. Be furious with the fuckheads who are going to force us into it. Don’t argue to me that the suffering it will cause is in any way acceptable. It isn’t.
According to pew research , 40% of Texas is democrat or leans democrat, most can’t leave. 20% aren’t sure. Only 40% or so is hard repub or leans that way.
Nah. Humans have driven 70% of all species to extinction. There’s no species worth saving with that kind of track record. Hopefully earth will find harmony thousands or millions of years after we’re gone!
If that’s your take, then consider that you’re talking about a civil war and it won’t destroy our species, maybe not even our country, but it’ll damage the planet a lot more than we already have.
War isn’t good for anyone. Not us, not other animals, not the planet. Not now, not in the long-term. You only wish for it because you haven’t seen it, or the aftermath, and don’t know what it’s like.
It’s just another piece of the polycrisis we’re heading towards, with the main force of instability being the climate tipping points we’ve started and continue to trigger.
Check out the limits to growth if you’re interested.
Man, you’re all over the map. First it’s civil war, now you want to talk about the climate. Finish the topic in front of you, I’m just responding to what you’re saying.
Dems: “Help! We sent a letter with strongest possible wording, it wasn’t effective, and we’re all out of ideas!”
How many times do conservatives have to slap Dems in the face before realizing they aren’t good faith actors?! Genocide in the Middle East, murder for fun on the southern border…what a mess.
The clear answer here is to say if Texas demands to police the boarder, all Federal boarder agents will be pulled back, and funding for boarder protection will be withheld. You can’t have it both ways.
I completely agree. If they want to, then let them. Easiest solution
Yeah, because the feds do such a bang up job of securing the border…
Anything that goes wrong there is the fault of 30 years of Republicans blocking any sort of change. Don’t blame the feds, they don’t have the authority to fix this problem. Congress is the only one who can.
Republicans: We need stronger border protections!
DHS: Here’s increased BPD funding and facility modernization efforts.
Republicans: No. Only death.
Time to recolonize Texas, send in the settlers.
Just give it back to Mexico. When the Texans try to immigrate into the US, nudge them into the nearest river.
Wait no! Some of us want out!
God I hate our state government
Also remember Ken Paxton is a criminal
They decided the pronouns of Texas are her? Awfully progressive, didn’t know the state of Texas could even have a gender?
