Texas' plans to apprehend and order the departure of migrants entering the U.S. illegally is heading to the Supreme Court, setting the stage for a legal showdown regarding the federal government's power over immigration. In a move that temporarily halts the implementation of the law, Justice Samuel Alito issued an order on Monday, pushing back the effective date until March 13. This comes after the Justice Department requested the Supreme Court's intervention, framing the Texas law as a significant challenge to federal immigration authority.

Referred to as Senate Bill 4, the law had received the approval of the conservative-leaning 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to take effect on Saturday. However, opponents have criticized it as the most noteworthy attempt by a state to assume immigration enforcement since an Arizona law over a decade ago. Critics argue that the law, by granting state officers the power to arrest individuals suspected of illegal entry, encroaches on federal immigration jurisdiction.

A coalition of groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, characterized Senate Bill 4 as a measure that bypasses federal immigration authority and undermines the fundamental principles of the nation's constitution and laws. Republican Governor Greg Abbott signed the law in December as part of a series of escalating measures aimed at addressing the border crisis and limiting unauthorized entry into the country.

The law allows state officers to arrest individuals believed to have entered the country unlawfully. Subsequently, those arrested can either comply with a Texas judge's order of departure or face a misdemeanor charge for illegal entry. If individuals fail to leave following the judge's order, they could be re-arrested and charged with a more severe felony offense.

The Justice Department argues that the law would significantly disrupt the existing balance in immigration enforcement between the federal government and states, jeopardizing the relationship between the United States and Mexico. Additionally, the federal government contends that Senate Bill 4 would create chaos in enforcing federal immigration laws within Texas. It cites a 2012 Supreme Court ruling on a similar Arizona law, emphasizing that state intervention is not justified due to a lack of progress in immigration reform at the federal level.

The Supreme Court has granted Texas until March 11 to respond to the emergency request. The Texas Attorney General's Office maintains that the law aligns with federal legislation and addresses the ongoing crisis at the southern border, which affects Texans more than anyone else. However, in a comprehensive ruling last week, U.S. District Judge David Ezra criticized Texas' immigration enforcement efforts, ruling that Senate Bill 4 violates the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, conflicts with federal immigration law, and could impact foreign relations and treaty obligations.

Republicans supporting the law contend that it will not target immigrants already residing in the U.S., as the statute of limitations for illegal entry charges would only apply along the state's border with Mexico. Texas has been arresting migrants for years under a different program centered on criminal trespass arrests.

The legal battle over the Texas immigration law represents one of several disputes between state officials and the Biden administration regarding border security. Numerous Republican governors have voiced support for Governor Abbott's actions, alleging that the federal government is insufficiently enforcing existing immigration laws. These efforts include the construction of a floating barrier in the Rio Grande and the placement of razor wire along the Texas-Mexico boundary. Furthermore, state guard officers have prevented U.S. Border Patrol agents from accessing a riverfront park in Eagle Pass, impeding their ability to process migrants, which has sparked ongoing legal challenges.

The outcome of the Supreme Court's review of the Texas law will undoubtedly have significant implications for the balance of power between federal and state authorities in matters of immigration.