Labrador Letter – Parole in Place Injunction Win

Dear Friends,

Two weeks ago, I filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas against the Biden-Harris Administration confronting their massive overreach with an immigration policy called "Parole in Place," or PIP. Fourteen other state attorneys general joined the suit, and it is co-led with my Texas counterpart and colleague, Ken Paxton.

Less than one working day after filing, we had our response. The Court saw the merits of our suit and immediately granted a temporary injunction, stopping the Administration's overreach in its tracks. The Court agreed that our claims were "substantial" when it came to assessing the damage this policy scheme could present to the states.

This was a swift and encouraging preliminary victory as the case proceeds on an expedited schedule in the U.S. District Court. We are confident that since a Court grants injunctions based on the merits of the case and the likelihood of success, we are in an excellent position to prevail against the Administration's scheme.

The Parole in Place program was originally designed to allow some illegal immigrants to remain in the United States, specifically for "urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit" while their application is being resolved. A typical reason would be a child with a serious illness who is receiving a hard-to-find treatment. Courts have said clearly that the federal government "cannot use that power to parole aliens en masse."

However, according to the Administration, they have carte blanche to interpret that rule as they see fit, claiming, "unfettered discretion." Any time the government uses the word "unfettered" to describe the scope of their authority, you should prepare for a whole lot of abuse and overreach. The Administration claims it can grant a pending legal status to the 1.3 million illegal immigrants who now currently qualify under their new interpretation - married to a U.S. citizen but entered the country illegally. Not an urgent humanitarian reason, a significant public benefit, and certainly not on a case-by-case basis.

Longstanding federal law prohibits aliens who entered the United States unlawfully from obtaining most immigration benefits - work permits, identification, and a legal pathway to more permanent residency. These provisions of law serve as powerful disincentives for individuals to cross the border illegally. Indeed, were they not present, there would be no practical reason for any alien to abide by the law, wait his or her turn, and only come to the United States when the law provides. Unless, of course, the Biden-Harris Administration decides to change the rules in the last few months of an election year. Then it's a pretty big incentive.

The Biden-Harris Administration is choosing to reward those who broke our laws. This is a decision for political expediency and opportunism. We cannot and will not abandon the moral position that the rule of law still matters in our Republic. For an administration which continually tells voters they must "save democracy," they seem oddly committed to its destruction. "Unfettered discretion" is a less-than-subtle way to describe absolutism.

Our laws aren't perfect, any more than the people who write them. Our immigration laws need serious reform, just as the laws protecting our border need serious enforcement. This Administration has failed spectacularly on both fronts and continues to circumvent Congress. But we cannot allow their political favoritism to cheapen the value of legally immigrating to the United States.

Best regards,

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.