Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and several other state AGs recently filed a lawsuit to stop the “Parole with Conditions” policy that allows aliens to enter the US without consequences.
Paxton, along with Attorney Generals from Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee and West Virginia filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for illegally authorizing an unlawful policy named “Parole with Conditions” that will allow hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens to be released into the United States. They allege that the policy is in direct violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
According to the lawsuit, the Parole with Conditions policy goes against the law and exceeds the Defendants’ statutory authority or applicable limitations, or falls short of statutory right, thereby violating the APA. Additionally, the policy’s implementation and operation also violate the Immigration and Naturalization Act.
Plaintiffs state the Parole with Conditions policy is in violation of the APA’s requirement that it not be arbitrary or capricious. The Defendants did not consider alternative options, such as expanding the Migrant Protection Protocols, which would have required more illegal aliens to remain in Mexico during immigration proceedings. The policy’s reliance interests were not taken into account, including the costs it imposes on third parties such as the States, individuals who are directly or indirectly harmed by the increased illegal immigration and illegal aliens themselves who may face victimization. Such victimization may include blackmail, kidnapping, sexual assault, physical violence, and hostage-taking by middlemen who facilitate travel to the Southwest Border.
The relief sought by the plaintiffs includes the temporary restraining or staying of the implementation and operation of the Parole with Conditions program, as well as the vacating or permanent enjoining of the program. They also request a declaration that the program exceeds the statutory parole authority of the defendants, and that attorneys’ fees and costs of court be awarded to the states. In addition, they seek any other relief they may be entitled to following a trial on the merits.
