Immigration and Citizenship

RELEASE: Supreme Court Decision Allows Administration to Prioritize Certain Noncitizens for Immigration Enforcement, as Presidential Administrations Have Done for Decades

WASHINGTON, DC – Following the Supreme Court’s announcement of its decision this morning in United States v. Texas, which rejected a state-led challenge to a Biden Administration memo that sets priorities for immigration enforcement, Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) Appellate Counsel Smita Ghosh issued the following reaction:

Today’s decision allows the Biden Administration to use guidance documents to prioritize individuals for immigration enforcement.  As my organization explained in a brief filed on behalf of former officials who served in both Republican and Democratic administrations at the Department of Homeland Security and the Immigration and Naturalization Service, immigration officials have often used documents like the one at issue here to ensure that enforcement discretion is exercised in a consistent and transparent manner.

While the Supreme Court did not reach the merits of the challenge to the Administration’s policy memo, ruling instead on standing grounds, its decision is significant insofar as it allows immigration officials to cope with limited enforcement resources by carefully prioritizing particular noncitizens for removal, as they have done for decades.

##

Resources:

Case page in United States v. Texas: https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/united-states-v-texas/

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a nonpartisan think tank and public interest law firm dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text, history, and values. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Immigration and Citizenship

Immigration and Citizenship
April 1, 2026

CAC Release: Justices Skeptical of Administration’s Domicile-Driven Approach to Birthright Citizenship

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Trump v....
By: Smita Ghosh
Immigration and Citizenship
March 31, 2026

Most Americans Favor Birthright Citizenship. That Wasn’t Always True.

New York Times
Elizabeth Wydra was quoted in the New York Times discussing the history of the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship...
Immigration and Citizenship
March 30, 2026

Why the Supreme Court will get the birthright citizenship case right

National Catholic Reporter
Smita Ghosh's Slate article about Lynch v. Clarke and birthright citizenship was cited in an op-ed in the National Catholic...
Immigration and Citizenship
March 21, 2026

Legal History Blog Weekly Roundup

Legal History Blog
CAC Senior Appellate Counsel Smita Ghosh's article in Slate about birthright citizenship was cited in...
Immigration and Citizenship
March 24, 2026

CAC Release: Justices Consider Government’s Novel Reading of Law Concerning Asylum-Seekers at the Border

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Noem v....
By: Smita Ghosh
Immigration and Citizenship
March 20, 2026

The Supreme Court’s Birthright Citizenship Decision Hinges on a Case You’ve Never Heard Of

CAC Senior Appellate Counsel Smita Ghosh's article about the history of birthright citizenship in Slate magazine was featured...
By: Smita Ghosh