Texas and the Biden administration are increasingly pulling each other to court.
First, it was about enforcing immigration regulations on the US-Mexico border. Then a Texas ban on most abortions. Then this week, just days after the Justice Department asked the US Supreme Court to stop the nation’s most restrictive abortion law, Attorney General Merrick Garland brought another lawsuit against America’s largest red state, this time over restrictive new electoral rules.
With President Joe Biden’s own domestic political priorities bogged down in Congress despite his party’s control, his administration is also trying to tear down pillars of a far-right agenda that the Texas GOP pushed through last year. This could give a boost to Democrats looking to win as they face already blustery prospects for the 2022 midterm elections.
But waging the fight is still not the comprehensive federal legislation the Democrats are seeking, and a Conservative majority in the Supreme Court could ultimately stand in the way.
Although the judges signaled Monday that they would allow abortion providers in Texas to challenge a controversial law that has banned most abortions in the state since September, it wasn’t clear whether they would leave the restrictions in place for the time being.
“It seems like every harmful law in the state of Texas ends up in federal court,” said Trey Martinez Fischer. “The Republicans control every lever of government in the state of Texas. If you wanted to celebrate Christmas in April, you have the votes. But just because they have the votes doesn’t necessarily mean that. “
Texas Republicans have defended their laws as legal, and Governor Greg Abbott responded to the latest lawsuit by tweeted, “Bring it.”
Depending on the party in the White House, large states have become ardent centers of resistance. California has proudly sued the Trump administration more than 120 times. During the Obama administration, Abbott’s biggest applause was that his previous job as attorney general was to go to the office, sue the federal government, and go home.
Less than a week after Biden was sworn in, Texas eagerly took on the role of the main opponent of a Democratic president, suing a 100-day moratorium on deportation. Texas has not let up since then and is rushing to challenge the Biden government at every turn, including a lawsuit filed Friday over COVID-19 vaccine mandates for private companies.
“The Biden Administration’s new vaccination mandate for private companies is a breathtaking abuse of federal power,” said Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, calling the requirement “thoroughly unconstitutional.”
The Biden administration’s latest lawsuit against Texas, filed Thursday, seeks to make a major overhaul of the GOP-backed election that spanned months of Democratic protests, including a 38-day strike that brought the Capitol to a standstill in the summer had brought.
Texas is one of at least 18 states that have introduced new voting restrictions since the 2020 elections, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. The laws were part of a GOP campaign in the name of election security, fueled in part by claims made by former President Donald Trump that the election had been stolen.
The Biden administration also sued Georgia over its new electoral laws. But the larger goal for the Democrats remains unattainable: New federal election laws are necessary to counter the wave of GOP voting measures. However, these efforts failed to overcome resistance from the Republicans in the Senate, who labeled it a seizure of power.
On Monday, Supreme Court justices sounded less convinced that the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Texas over its abortion law should continue. Judge Elena Kagan suggested that a ruling in favor of the providers instead would allow the court to avoid difficult federal jurisdiction issues.
More than 100 prosecutors and former judges signed against the law in a pleading filed by the Fair and Just Prosecution group, arguing that abandoning Texas law would allow states to put an end to federal law.
“The fact that it’s Texas means more women are affected,” said Miriam Krinsky, the group’s executive director. “But if a state had chosen to introduce this kind of illegal construct, I think we would have found a lot of concerned people across the country willing to come together to speak up.”
[ad_1]
