Immigration and Citizenship

RELEASE: Win for Migrants at Southwest Border and Presidential Authority in Immigration  

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s ruling from the Supreme Court in Biden v. Texas—in which the Constitutional Accountability Center filed a brief on behalf of a bipartisan group of former Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Naturalization Service officials in support of the Biden Administration—CAC President Elizabeth Wydra issued the following reaction:

This ruling is an important victory for people in immigration proceedings at our southwest border—many of them families and asylum seekers seeking refuge in the United States—and the authority of the president to regulate immigration policy in accordance with the text and history of our nation’s immigration laws.

The Court today was right to recognize that the Biden administration had the authority to rescind the Trump-era MPP policy. As the Court explained, the result it reached today is required by the text of the relevant immigration law and confirmed by the historical context in which it was passed.

Moreover, echoing our brief on behalf of a bipartisan group of former DHS and INS officials, the Court noted that for over two decades “every Presidential administration has interpreted section 1225(b)(2)(C) as purely discretionary.”  Indeed, even though “congressional funding has consistently fallen well short of the amount needed to detain all land-arriving inadmissible aliens at the border, . . . no administration has ever used section 1225(b)(2)(C) to return all such aliens that it could not otherwise detain.”

In reaching this result today, the Court also respected the significant enforcement discretion that Congress has long conferred on the executive branch in the realm of immigration policy. That discretion is critical to the ability of the president to competently manage our nation’s foreign affairs.



CAC’s case page in Biden v. Texas:


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


More from Immigration and Citizenship

Immigration and Citizenship
June 3, 2024

Improper DHS Appointment Voids Asylum Rule, Groups Argue

Law360 (June 3, 2024, 8:43 PM EDT) -- Two immigrant advocacy groups suing the federal...
By: Brian R. Frazelle, Ali Sullivan
Immigration and Citizenship
June 23, 2023

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...
By: Smita Ghosh
Immigration and Citizenship
January 17, 2023

RELEASE: Supreme Court Considers Access to Courts for Asylum-Seekers

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Santos-Zacaria v....
By: Smita Ghosh
Immigration and Citizenship
November 29, 2022

RELEASE: Justices Acknowledge the Federal Government’s Authority over Immigration Enforcement When Confronted With State Opposition

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in United States...
By: Smita Ghosh
Immigration and Citizenship
September 19, 2022

RELEASE: Biden Administration Memo Setting Priorities for Immigration Enforcement Is Lawful, Group of Former DHS and INS Officials Tell Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, DC – Earlier today, the Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) filed a brief in the...
By: Smita Ghosh
Immigration and Citizenship
U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Texas

In United States v. Texas, the Supreme Court considered whether Department of Homeland Security guidance on immigration enforcement priorities is lawful.