Image 01 Image 03

Biden Demands Texas Allow Border Patrol Into Shelby Park to Cut Wire

Biden Demands Texas Allow Border Patrol Into Shelby Park to Cut Wire

The illegal immigrants could go to the legal port of entry that is literally right next to the park blocked off by the wire.

The Supreme Court vacated an injunction from the 5th Circuit that only gave the feds permission to cut Texas’s border wire at Shelby Park in Eagle Pass, TX.

That is all. Nothing more, nothing less.

The Texas Military Department has kept the feds out of the park to keep them from cutting the wire.

But President Joe Biden’s lousy administration gave Texas 24 hours to allow border patrol into Shelby Park so the agents could cut the wire. The DHS sent Texas General Attorney Ken Paxton a letter demanding access to the park:

As you are aware, yesterday, the Supreme Court vacated the injunction prohibiting the Department from cutting or moving the concertina wire that Texas had placed along the border except in case of emergency, and restored the Department’s right to cut and move the concertina wire placed by Texas in order to perform their statutory duties. The Department must also have the ability to access the border in the Shelby Park area that is currently obstructed by Texas.

The State has alleged that Shelby Park is open to the public, but we do not believe this statement is accurate. To our knowledge, Texas has only permitted access to Shelby Park by allowing public entry fora memorial, the media, and use of the golf course adjacent to Shelby Park, all while continuing to restrictU.S. Border Patrol’s access to the park. Please clarify the scope of access Texas permits to the public.

Again. The order only said agents could cut the wire. It didn’t tell Texas to give the agents access to the park.

Facts don’t matter. DHS wants everything that has nothing to do with the SCOTUS order:

  • Access to Eagle Pass International Bridge Port of Entry II, also known as Camino Real International Bridge, from the Loop 480 access road, 24 hours a day. This is to include beneath the port of entry as well.
  • Access through the federal border barrier entrances described above located on Ford Street, Main Street, near the intersection of Rio Grande Street and Ryan Street, and the two entrances on the end of Ryan Street, for Border Patrol to move through and conduct line watch duties and patrol withing the Shelby Park area 24 hours a day.
  • Full access to the boat ramp located at Shelby Park Main Street entrance, consistent with the perpetual easement.
  • Unrestricted access to the entire Shelby Park are during emergency circumstances, including, but not limited to, assistance to other agents and officers as well as medical and rescue operations.
  • Independent journalist Auden Cabello discovered that most of the Eagle Pass citizens support Abbott.

    With Shelby Park secured, the border patrol agents can now patrol the border.

    One ranger told Cabella he’s happy to see the agents back where they belong.

    Ali Bradley pointed out a legal port of entry right next to Shelby Park.

    The people do not have to cross into Shelby Park.

    Gee, I wonder why they don’t want to go through a legal port of entry.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    NO, freaking turn back

    This is just a dog and pony show

    Few? Like 8 million few?

    “The few immigrants who are making it to the border are finding it harder to cross and turn themselves in to Border Patrol”.

    I think the big guy is getting 10% from the Mexican cartels

    What other reason could there be


    (Spartacus reference)

    While throwing open the border, how do these leftists explain why all these people want to come to the systemically racist, capitalist, misogynistic, islamophobic, cis-heteronormative patriarchy that is the USA? There has to be more to it than an EBT card and an Obamaphone.

    To quote a Texas saying from the Alamo days, “Come and Take It”.


    Getting a bit more spicy and the WH has only themselves to blame. Whatever the outcome of the legal wrangling over access to Shelby Park the PR battle against Biden’s open border policies has been won by TX yet the Biden WH continues to dig a deeper hole. ‘Hey TX, no fair not letting us into the park to cut the wire’. Stupid. Do they even need to enter through the land ward side v using a boat to access and cut the wire? I don’t see any issue of ‘necessity’ here rather it seems to be one of convenience.

    Texas to biden: No.

    POTUS using authority granted to him under 10 U.S. Code § 12406, may only federalize National Guard units if…

    (1) the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation;
    (2) there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or
    (3) the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States;

    Here’s the problem for Biden, unlike National Guard troops being recalled to active-duty and deployed pursuant to the Goldwater-Nichols act, the Governor of the respective Guard Unit remains in the Guard’s chain-of-command. Biden would be ‘solving’ one constitutional crisis with another constitutional crisis…which honestly, would be very Biden.

    Also, I’m not even sure if the circumstances of this incident meet the qualification established in the statute. In fact, he would be federalizing the National Guard not to stop a foreign invasion but rather, to ENABLE one. Seems Impeachable, to me.

    Also, there aren’t enough federal law enforcement officers available to ‘cut the wire?’ That seems unlikely considering there are more than hundred thousand of them. There are more federal LEOs than there are US Marines, Active & Reserve components combined.

      2nd Ammendment Mother in reply to TargaGTS. | January 26, 2024 at 11:53 am

      also remember that the Castro brothers are Soros/Obama stooges

        Like Barack Obama, those two are little Communist bitch puppets. They literally grew up on the knees of America-hating commies with fever dreams about ‘Reconquista’ which is the Central Americans ‘taking the US back’ from whitey. And they call us racist.

      We support Abbott and Texas in this. Please remember that when we ask our question.

      You wrote:

      10 U.S. Code § 12406, may only federalize National Guard units if…

      (1) the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation;

      Abbott is using Article 4, Section 4 and Article 1, Section 10 to justify his actions. Article 1 Section 10 deals with the idea that a state may protect itself if it is being invaded.

      If Abbott says his state is being invaded and therefore has the right to defend itself, can’t Biden seize control of the Texas National Guard by relying on Abbot’s own contention?

      Once again, we don’t agree with Biden and this administration on their handling of the border crisis. We are firmly in the Abbott / Texas corner on this issue. Please don’t assume that we are for Biden seizing control of the TNG.

        TargaGTS in reply to gitarcarver. | January 26, 2024 at 12:31 pm

        First, you refer to ‘we’ several times in your comment. I”m not sure who ‘we’ is. In any event, Biden is being encouraged by many Democrat politicians to federalize the Texas National Guard in order to (essentially) take control of the Texas National Guard and presumably order them to remove the border barriers they’ve installed at Abbott’s direction. The point of my comment is to highlight that federalization is more complicated than those Dem politicians would like to pretend and in fact, may not be allowable (in these current circumstances) given the statutory limitations.

        But, if Biden does end up federalizing these Guardsman, it’s going to simply create yet another constitutional crisis.

          We agree that it is more complicated than Biden saying “I’m taking control of the TNG.”

          Yet the very statute you provide would seem to support Biden being able to take control of the TNG based upon Abbott’s own words.

          We see that as a problem.

          diver64 in reply to TargaGTS. | January 27, 2024 at 6:16 am

          I agree with you. I think the complications in the Federal Code is why Abbot is not using any of it to install the wire and keep out the Feds. He is using the Constitution which supersedes all Federal Code and says so in his letter. Smart move on his part. Considering that there is a legal Port Of Entry right next to the park in question shows what Biden wants, illegal entry into the US.

        henrybowman in reply to gitarcarver. | January 26, 2024 at 2:35 pm

        Not even Biden is stupid enough (yet) to use a state declaration of invasion as a valid emergency to nationalize the National Guard to… abet that invasion.

          Ironclaw in reply to henrybowman. | January 26, 2024 at 3:28 pm

          With how confused the pedophile in chief is, he might think he made the Declaration

          sfharding in reply to henrybowman. | January 26, 2024 at 6:03 pm

          Glad you said (yet). Never underestimate the stupidity of Biden, or the all consuming anti-American hatred of his puppet masters. To them, this represents an opening and an opportunity.

          Lucifer Morningstar in reply to henrybowman. | January 26, 2024 at 7:44 pm

          Not even Biden is stupid enough . . .

          BWHAHAHAHAHAHA . . . snicker . . .snort . . . deep cleansing breath . . .

          Sorry, couldn’t help myself. But yes, Biden is just that effing stupid to do just that. Precipitate a Constitutional crisis by federalizing the TNG and ordering them to remove the razor wire to facilitate illegal crossing of the border. Biden simply doesn’t care about this country or the Constitution. He and the rest of the democrats will do what is necessary to force the issue come heck or high water.

          diver64 in reply to henrybowman. | January 27, 2024 at 6:12 am

          Your assuming it’s Biden in control, he is not. He doesn’t know what day of the week it is. Dr Jill and the radical Obama crowd are doing this with Biden the fall guy.

      Paddy M in reply to TargaGTS. | January 26, 2024 at 1:37 pm

      Good post, but I’m concerned that the junta will ignore what you laid out and do it anyway. The point about enabling an invasion is spot on.

        TargaGTS in reply to Paddy M. | January 26, 2024 at 1:53 pm

        This is, of course, not only a possibility but a probability. While Biden fallaciously complains about Texas ignoring a Supreme Court ‘order’ he continues to retire student debt after the Supreme Court told him it was illegal. As I mentioned in another thread, this is how a late-stage Republic behaves…with an Imperial Presidency.

      Gosport in reply to TargaGTS. | January 27, 2024 at 5:48 am

      Biden’s position is politically and legally unsustainable

      What Texas is doing is in support of federal law, which calls for detention of illegals. What Biden has been doing for 3+ years now is in violation of that law.

      If Biden attempts to activate the TX NG he is doing so to support his illegal actions. That’s going to last about a minute before a Judge says “nope”.

      And to clarify, the Supreme Court order does NOT forbid Texas from preventing the feds from cutting their wire. It vacated an injunction previously entered by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that had prohibited the Government from damaging or destroying Texas’ wire.

      Big difference.

      diver64 in reply to TargaGTS. | January 27, 2024 at 6:11 am

      I’ve heard a couple of arguments about whether or not Biden can federalize the National Guard in this instance and remove them from Abbot’s control but nothing in depth or persuasive one way or the other so far.
      The bigger question is if Biden attempts to do this will the Texas Guard listen? If he activates the Guard from a different state will those go and get into a confrontation with the Texas Guard? The optics of the whole thing are terrible for Biden no matter what the talking heads say. He sued Texas and is threatening them over their refusal to allow open borders and unfettered illegal alien entry into the US. That is a tough thing to defend when everyone including Dem Governors and Mayors can see the destruction this policy is causing and now it’s big enough everyone can not ignore it. Trying to blame it on Republicans and Trump is a dog that won’t hunt and no one is buying it.

        henrybowman in reply to diver64. | January 27, 2024 at 3:58 pm

        “I’ve heard a couple of arguments about whether or not Biden can federalize the National Guard in this instance and remove them from Abbot’s control but nothing in depth or persuasive one way or the other so far.”
        Perpich v. DOD. He can.

    2nd Ammendment Mother | January 26, 2024 at 11:51 am

    Hell of a day to be a Texan….. living like its Gonzalez 1835.

    Dear Joe Biden*,

    Come and suck it.



    Fat_Freddys_Cat | January 26, 2024 at 12:04 pm

    I hope the Texans tell Biden “demand in one hand and shit in the other; see which one fills up the fastest”.

    The people pulling Biden’s strings are now backing the President into a corner, likely on purpose. If Abbott holds the line, the next step is invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807.

      The next step is the feds will withhold block grants to Texas. I do hope Abbott’s political spine stays strong, but $$$$ talks, and bs walks.

        CommoChief in reply to LB1901. | January 26, 2024 at 4:16 pm

        The Executive Branch could DELAY the funds appropriated to TX but only until the end of the FY. At that point they gotta send the funds or risk consequences including impeachment but also a CT order to to do so.

        Impeachment, on his particular issue wouldn’t be as far fetched as we may believe b/c creating a precedent of refusing to impeach over this would be detrimental to whole process. If Biden can simply stop funds going to States doing things he doesn’t like despite being appropriated by Congress then so could Trump or any other future President.

      paracelsus in reply to SHV. | January 26, 2024 at 1:49 pm

      Just who are “The people pulling Biden’s strings…”?

    Wait a second. In the context of this proceeding, did the S.Ct. issue an order allowing the Feds to cut the wire? No. They just vacated an injunction that would have prevented this action. The merits of whether they have authority or not to do so, or whether the state can prevent this, is still pending. As of now, there is no S.Ct. order empowering Biden to do anything in this case. If I’m wrong, someone please correct me.

    If they are here illegally then the constitution does not grant them 2A rights, but we have ours. There is also no record of who they are and where they are.
    Do the math.

      henrybowman in reply to scooterjay. | January 26, 2024 at 2:37 pm

      The constitution doesn’t “grant” anyone 2nd amendment rights.

      United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)
      The right to keep and bear arms exists separately from the Constitution and is not solely based on the Second Amendment, which exists to prevent Congress from infringing the right.

    All of this because a flood tide of 40m+ unvetted illegals – over the course of three decades – has yet to drop the price of home remodeling in Martha’s Vineyard, Austin, Pacific Heights and Malibu.

    And Gavin needs slaves to prune the vineyard, muck-out ditches and mow the lawn next to the tasting room parking lot.

    The scariest part of this is that some of the scenes on the campaign trail when confronted by voters, he really looks agitated almost to the point of fighting the guy, Do I trust him to do the smart thing?

    I’d like to see someone more graphically skilled than I prepare a “Come and Take It” flag with razor wire instead of a cannon and the words “Come and Cut It.”

    thalesofmiletus | January 26, 2024 at 1:01 pm

    The Biden admin is functionally insane. The only issue anyone is talking about is the border crisis, and Biden — with all the stubbornness of King Charles I — is bound and determined to make himself as unpopular as possible while running for reelection.

    This specific instance of insanity is just a reflection of the Left’s general insanity. All they needed to do was be patient. They needed to keep the steady stream of alien invaders coming across the border to a dull roar to effect The Great Replacement and thus permanent Democratic victories.

    But no! They got scared and crazy. They can’t put the Woke away. Their panicked, white-knuckled hold onto the reigns of power might be their undooing. MAGA is ascendant — it’s anyone’s guess what happens now.

      Very salient points which I believe are all correct…and also why I believe Biden isn’t actually running for reelection. When Biden drops out sometime before the convention – but BEFORE there would be time for anyone else to get in the race and win the requisite number of delegates to win on the first ballot – everything that is wrong with the country will be blamed on Biden and then deemed by the media as moot because he’s not running for reelection, which is essentially what they did in 1968 and it damn near worked. Nixon won an electoral landslide with a TINY margin of victory.

      But,as you capably point out, the damage he’s doing is well on its way to creating a permanent governing majority for Democrats for the foreseeable future even if they don’t quite manage to win this year…and that presumes Michelle Obama isn’t the nominee they’re waiting to spring upon us at their brokered convention…in Chicago, Michelle Obama’s home town. Did you ever wonder why the Dems decided to have their convention in a uncompetitive deep blue state?

        henrybowman in reply to TargaGTS. | January 26, 2024 at 2:44 pm

        Hell, no. What puzzles the hell out of me is why the Second Amendment Foundation deliberately holds every other annual Gun Rights Policy Conference in blue states, discouraging many of the people who would otherwise attend. Compared to that, the DNC’s choice makes total sense.

        gonzotx in reply to TargaGTS. | January 26, 2024 at 3:16 pm

        They don’t need competition, they have the steal

        But chi town and Mechelle is interesting

        Terrifying because idiots would vote for her on top of the steal they got in store for us

        Ironclaw in reply to TargaGTS. | January 26, 2024 at 3:33 pm

        From some things I’ve been seeing, the black residents of Chicago are not very happy about their resources being spent on illegal aliens. They might not have the peaceful Democratic Convention they thought they would in Chicago this year

          gonzotx in reply to Ironclaw. | January 26, 2024 at 3:57 pm

          Biden Has Spent 20 BILLION CITIZEN TAXPAYER DOLLARS “Resettling” Illegal Aliens in the Past Two Years Alone
          —Disinformation Expert Ace

          Cost a lot of money to move “refugees” into people’s communities at midnight so they can’t object to what “their” government is doing.

          Fake asylum seekers, future (current?) Democrat voters. Here’s $20 billion.

    a public park is not much unlike a village green–long ago a group of our countrymen in new england stood-up to tyranny and behold the world was forever changed

      Paddy M in reply to texansamurai. | January 26, 2024 at 4:22 pm

      Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.

      ~ John Parker

      One of my favorite quotes from the Revolutionary period. Those men had some stones.

      H/T to the poster yesterday for the blockquote tip.

    Keep it up Abbot, tell that pedophile to go F himself.

    We should also be pressing for an end to all welfare for the illegal aliens. No food, healthcare, housing, education, work permits, driver’s licenses, etc.

    All incentives should be eliminated.

      TargaGTS in reply to ChrisPeters. | January 26, 2024 at 2:11 pm

      There’s a reason why a huge chunk of these illegals still try to get themselves to blue states like CA, WA, NY, PA and IL and that reason is they’ve rolled out the welcome mat papered with public welfare giveaways targeting the illegals. Red states have taken steps to restrict or minimize the public funds available to illegals. However, because of existing Supreme Court precedent – Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 – all states are required to allow minor children into the public school system irrespective of their immigration status or the immigration status of their parents. So, while the red states have done some of the heavy lifting, until the blue states stop giving away the farm, their social safety nets is like a gigantic illegal alien magnet.

        ChrisPeters in reply to TargaGTS. | January 26, 2024 at 2:34 pm

        Pyler v. Doe, which would seem to mandate the use of funds from citizens for the benefit of non-citizens, should be ignored as an unconstitutional ruling, Supreme Court be damned.

        The Supreme Court has had numerous unconstitutional, and even immoral, rulings in the past, including Dredd Scott, Koramatsu, etc.

        The states should stand up for the rights of their citizens, and put an end to education for the illegals.

        They are here to pry up a few of the bricks in the streets paved with gold. That’s it.

    Every world leader around the globe knows Biden is nothing but a windbag and a coward in the face of actual opposition.

    Right now, Texas needs somebody who can remind Abbott of this.

    I am still in favor of creating a 100 yard DMZ, and seeding it with landmines and signs that say “ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK”.

    Heck, you probably don’t even need that many landmines – dig a bunch of holes, and only put in one landmine for every 1000, and let the roulette begin.

    “Stand your ground. Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here

    The key is to look for the words that wist the truth into what they desire.
    restored the Department’s right to cut and move the concertina wire
    And there it is. The government is claiming a right to eliminate the state’s safety barriers. Not a legal justification balancing laws against each other, not a constitutional duty. No, a right.

    “ Why the hell is Abbott in India, and not home manning the helm during this crisis?”

    It was decided a couple hundred comments ago, he’s in India to obtain tiger blood, so he can walk again, and lead the troops in the Alamo, who are waiting for the federales to arrive in strength.

    From Aceofspadeshq comments

    Had no idea Abbott was in India
    This certainly makes it look like he’s really just playing games

    Now Paxton, I trust him, more than Abbott, but this makes Abbott look like an idiot

    Long past time to ratchet this up. If the feds trespass, arrest the feds. Abbott, this is your opportunity to become a national hero. Biteme is a national disgrace.

    What really bothers me about this fiasco is that it illustrates how much states rights have been subsumed by imperial presidencies supported by feckless legislators.

    IF this all leads to a constitutional convention one of the first items on the table should be to eliminate the 17th amendment and go back to the state legislatures appointing their US Senators as our founders wrote it.

    Go back to them being responsible to their states and not to their party. Re-balance the power and put a check on the feds abuse of it.

      henrybowman in reply to Gosport. | January 27, 2024 at 4:05 pm

      Yeah, I’ve never bought the reasoning for that. They will be of the party currently in power in that legislature, and will still be beholden to it. It will just be two free unelected seats for that party.
      In my lifetime there have actually been three Republican senators elected rom MA. WIthout the 17th Amendment, there would never have been any.

        Gosport in reply to henrybowman. | January 28, 2024 at 12:28 am

        The reason for doing so is that it very much reduces the power of the elites in the national party structure because Senators will be directly responsible to their states again.

        They would have to be responsive to the state’s needs and opinions all the time instead of just at election time as they could be recalled.

        The faceless national elite couldn’t just steamroller state party members regardless of local and state opinions on issues anymore.

        It will also have an effect on the uni-party situation which has formed at a national level.

          Milhouse in reply to Gosport. | January 28, 2024 at 12:41 am

          They would have to be responsive to the state’s needs and opinions all the time instead of just at election time as they could be recalled.

          And there lies your error, exactly as I suspected it did. Repealing the 17th amendment would just restore things to how they were before it was ratified. Senators could not be recalled. There is no such thing as recall in the US constitution and there never has been. You could amend the constitution to add it, if you like, but then why repeal the 17th? Let the people recall their senators, and for that matter their representatives and president. I think it’s a bad idea, but if you like, try advancing that amendment. What does repealing the 17th gain you?

      Milhouse in reply to Gosport. | January 28, 2024 at 12:34 am

      They are responsible to their states — directly to the people, not to the gerrymandered state legislators. The people are the states; that principle was established when the constitution was ratified by “we, the people of the united states”, rather than by the state legislatures

      Also, once a senator is elected he has six years during which he is responsible to nobody but his own conscience. Only towards the end of the term, if he decides to seek reelection, does he have to start taking the voters’ opinions into account. Changing that back to “the legislators’ opinions” would not change anything.

      Worse, state legislatures would turn into mere electoral colleges for the senate. People would elect their state legislators not on the basis of how they stood on state issues but on the basis of how they’d pledged to vote in the next senate election. The problem is that having done their job of electing a senator, these electors would not go home as presidential electors do, but would remain in the state capital and made the state’s laws for the next two years. How is that a good idea? And that is exactly what was happening in the years before the 17th amendment was made, and it’s why it was made.

        CommoChief in reply to Milhouse. | January 28, 2024 at 8:03 am

        One plus to ending 17A would be negating the advantage of incumbency. IMO it would be helpful in getting a Senator that more closely matched the will of the electorate. For example a very Red State would have the opportunity to bounce a rino without all the structural advantages being on the side of the incumbent. So SC could dump Graham without worrying about a general election pick up for the d/prog. Of course that would depend on the legislature and looking at TX….that compromised legislature may not be willing to dump Cornyn. Still there would be some additional turnover which as a good thing b/c it deters ‘permanent DC’ mentality.

    24 hours or what? Joe has not the balls to send federal forces, the optics would add more nails to his political coffin. The Feds have forbidden drones from flying over the Rio Grande area it is so bad. Joe is going to have to eat crow on this one.