NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The Supreme Court, without a notable dissent, allowed an agreement between Texas and the Justice Department ending a Biden-era immigration rule to take effect.
The Biden administration adopted the rule in 2024, formally establishing procedures for immigration judges to temporarily halt certain deportation proceedings through a practice known as an “administrative shutdown,” including when migrants sought immigration relief through other federal proceedings. The Supreme Court’s decision leaves in place a lower court ruling eliminating that rule, effectively removing a procedure that allowed some eviction cases to be stayed.
Texas sued the federal government in June, arguing the rule was adopted without proper legal authority.
The Justice Department sided with Texas, asking the judge in the case to strike down the rule and prevent similar rules from being adopted in the future.
JUDGE WHO APOLOGIZES TO ACCUSED ALLEGED TRUMP MURDER CLEARS DOJ IN FBI HUNTER BIDEN CASE
The Texas state flag flies alongside the logo of the U.S. Department of Justice. (Getty Images/DOJ)
Opponents have accused Texas and the Justice Department of collusion to eliminate the Biden-era rule, arguing that the two sides worked together despite being on opposing sides in the lawsuit.
On the same day the DOJ made its request, District Judge Reed O’Connor, appointed by President George W. Bush, granted it.
TRUMP-APPOINTED JUDGE CLASHES DOJ DOJ AS COURT LOSSES PILE UP DAYS BEFORE MID-SESSION
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, said his working relationship with President Donald Trump was based on their shared belief in public safety. (Shelby Tauber/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
In August, however, three cities with large immigrant populations: Baltimore, Maryland; New Haven, Conn.; and Columbus, Ohio — joined Centro Legal de la Raza, an immigrant rights group, in an effort to intervene in the case and defend the Biden-era rule on appeal.
The cities argued that eliminating this rule could lead to the eviction of residents, reducing their tax revenue and giving them legal standing to challenge the deal. O’Connor rejected this argument.
MAMDANI BLAST FED FOR LEADING “CAMPAIGN OF VIOLENCE AND TERROR” AGAINST NYC IMMIGRANTS
President Donald Trump, First Lady Melania Trump and Texas Governor Greg Abbott participate in a panel discussion at the Hill Country Youth Event Center July 11, 2025, in Kerrville, Texas. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
On October 9, the three cities and Centro Legal de la Raza asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block the lower court’s ruling while their appeal was pending, accusing Texas and the federal government of engaging in “blatant collusion” to eliminate the Biden-era rule.
Federal lawyers argued that the cities and their allies lacked the legal standing to challenge the deal because they had not demonstrated the concrete harm required for a federal court to consider their claims.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“We are deeply disappointed that the Supreme Court refused to intervene to stop the Trump-Vance administration from dismantling long-standing immigration court cases through a backdoor deal with Texas,” the cities and Centro Legal de la Raza said in a statement shared with Fox News Digital.
“For decades, these procedures have allowed immigration judges to temporarily suspend deportation proceedings for people seeking legal immigration relief, including survivors of abuse, abused and neglected children, and victims and witnesses who cooperate with law enforcement,” the statement continued. “Eliminating these protections puts vulnerable people at increased risk of eviction and undermines public safety in communities across the country.”
Gn headline
