Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Judge Extends His Suspension of Biden’s Deportation Freeze

Judge Extends His Suspension of Biden’s Deportation Freeze

The Court still finds the freeze would cause “irreparable harm” to Texas.

U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton in the Southern District of Texas issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on President Joe Biden’s deportation plan after Texas filed a lawsuit against the administration.

Tipton just extended the order for 14 days to February 23, 2021.

Tipton wrote that Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, which covers injunctions and restraining orders, allowed him to issue a TRO for only 14 days. Texas asked for an extension.

The rule allows the court to extend the TRO if a “good cause” justifies such a move.

The Court found “good cause” based on four reasons:

  • The extra time “is necessary for the record to be more fully developed.”
  • The deadlines for the defendants’ response to Texas’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and the state “to file a reply both fall outside the original 14-day period.”
  • The Court “needs time to assess the arguments and prepare a ruling on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction.”
  • The Court still finds the pause would cause “irreparable harm” to Texas.

Texas asked for the order after Biden signed an executive order to pause deportations for 100-days. The Department of Homeland Security hit the pause button on January 20th through a memo.

Tipton issued the TRO on January 6. It should have expired today, February 9th. He acknowledged concerns about his court issuing a TRO that covers the entire nation. But he said he must follow “the precedents of its Circuit.”

In one case, the Fifth Circuit said that “[i]t is not beyond the power of a court, in appropriate circumstances, to issue a nationwide injunction.” This included:

  • A need for “uniformity” in regards to immigration policies across the board
  • “Partial implementation” would cause a distraction from any “integrated scheme of regulation created by Congress.
  • The court also thought “a substantial likelihood that a geographically-limited injunction would be ineffective because [illegal aliens] would be free to move among states.”

Tipton stated that the Fifth Circuit’s explanation fit the lawsuit against the Biden executive order:

  • “The January 20 Memorandum’s 100-day pause plainly affects national immigration policy, which demands ‘uniformity.’”
  • “Because the January 20 Memorandum’s 100-day pause impacts numerous statutes and agency regulations concerning removals and detention periods, its partial implementation would inevitably detract from Congress’s ‘integrated scheme of regulation.’”
  • “Lastly, a geographically limited injunction of the January 20 Memorandum’s 100-day pause on removals would not effectively protect Texas’s interests because of the free flow of movement among the states.”

Tipton pointed out that those who are forced to leave “may migrate to Texas,” which old cause the state “irreparable harm.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Why don’t we just follow the immigration law to the letter instead of writing executive orders to try to circumvent the law?

    Mr/MS Ghost Rider, I assume yours is a rhetorical question. You already know the answer.

    Also, why bother going through congress when you can employ the e.o./fiat method?

    Publius_2020 in reply to Ghost Rider. | February 9, 2021 at 5:25 pm

    What a radical notion!

    The interesting part of this little battle is that it really implicates the kind of “judicial blockade” phenomena that we saw during the early Trump administration.

    So it will be comical if the Dems come out with a lot of “the judge is interfering with Joe’s executive decisions!” stuff.


      Voyager in reply to Publius_2020. | February 9, 2021 at 5:42 pm

      I suspect it is more likely that the various departments will do as they please and simply either ignore the injunction or the EO as the local unit wants too. Each can claim the authority based on the conflicting authorizations, and neither has the force to impose its will.

        jimincalif in reply to Voyager. | February 9, 2021 at 5:53 pm

        You are probably right. Leftists just ignore the law when it suits them to do so, knowing there are no adverse consequences to themselves.

    If not the black letter of the law, then penumbras and emanations, the Twilight Amendment, where any choice can be rationalized, legalized.

    UnCivilServant in reply to Ghost Rider. | February 9, 2021 at 9:32 pm

    I’m afraid that in this case, the letter of the law has divested a huge amount of congression responsibility for immigration policy to the president.

So, silly question, but what is the INS actually doing?

Are they in fact still deporting people, as Texas and the judge say they should? Are they slow-walking the deportations and de-facto following the Biden Administration’s orders?

“Temporary” in this case should mean the same as “deferred” in DACA.

Hint, hint, immigration folks. If you have anybody with final removal orders, put the piece of sh*t on a bus or plane immediately.

It’s nice that there are still a few sane and honest judges left, but the order will have no real effect. If Biden wants to stop deportations, they will stop. If pressed, they will claim procedural problems have slowed down (or stopped) the process.