India  

Border Agents Can Remove Razor Wire in Texas, Supreme Court Rules

Video Credit: Wibbitz Top Stories - Duration: 01:30s - Published
Border Agents Can Remove Razor Wire in Texas, Supreme Court Rules

Border Agents Can Remove Razor Wire in Texas, Supreme Court Rules

Border Agents Can Remove Razor Wire in Texas, , Supreme Court Rules.

On Jan.

22, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 in favor of vacating last month's appeals court ruling that stopped Texas border agents from removing razor wire, 'The Hill' reports.

.

Justices that voted in favor of the decision include John Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

The border conflict escalated when fences and razor wire were installed in Eagle Pass, Texas, earlier this month, 'The Hill' reports.

.

The razor wire prohibited Border Patrol officials from gaining access to the area.

.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton defended the state's actions.

.

Because the facts and law side with Texas, the state will continue utilizing its constitutional authority to defend her territory, and I will continue defending those lawful efforts in court.

, Texas AG Ken Paxton, via letter to DHS general counsel Jonathan Meyer.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security should stop wasting scarce time and resources suing Texas, and start enforcing the immigration laws Congress already has on the books, Texas AG Ken Paxton, via letter to DHS general counsel Jonathan Meyer.

Paxton's response came after DHS general counsel Jonathan Meyer wrote a cease-and-desist letter.

The recent actions by the State of Texas have impeded operations of the Border Patrol.

, DHS general counsel Jonathan Meyer, via cease-and-desist letter.

Those actions conflict with the authority and duties of Border Patrol under federal law and are preempted under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

Texas’s actions also improperly seek to regulate the federal government, DHS general counsel Jonathan Meyer, via cease-and-desist letter.

Recently, a migrant woman and two children drowned while attempting to cross into Texas.

Border Patrol officials blamed the Texas National Guard for blocking them from the river and ultimately preventing them from saving the migrants, 'The Hill' reports.

While Texas officials deny the claims, the Supreme Court has intervened with its ruling.


You Might Like


💡 newsR Knowledge: Other News Mentions

Texas Texas U.S. state

El Chapo's son 'duped alleged cartel boss into flying to US before their arrests'

An alleged Mexican drug cartel leader arrested in Texas was duped into flying to the US, officials have said.
Sky News

Longtime U.S. House Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee Dead at 74

Shelia Jackson Lee – the Texas congresswoman who spent three decades in office fighting for Black rights – has died. Her family issued a statement saying Lee..
TMZ.com
Musk says he will move SpaceX and X to Texas after California passes gender-identity law [Video]

Musk says he will move SpaceX and X to Texas after California passes gender-identity law

Credit: FRANCE 24 English    Duration: 01:52Published

Guess Who This Lil' Baby Turned Into!

Before this cute baby in her newborn clothes turned into an American musician, she was just hangin' with her toy animals, growing up in Detroit, Michigan and..
TMZ.com

Supreme Court of the United States Supreme Court of the United States Highest court of jurisdiction in the US

Bangladesh protesters give government deadline to meet new set of demands

Protesters have set the Bangladesh government 48 hours to meet a new set of demands after the country's Supreme Court dramatically scaled back a controversial..
Sky News
Kanwar Yatra Nameplate Controversy: Shop Vendors Cheer as Nameplates Come Down | Watch [Video]

Kanwar Yatra Nameplate Controversy: Shop Vendors Cheer as Nameplates Come Down | Watch

In a recent Supreme Court ruling, the directive requiring eateries along the Kanwariya yatra route to display the names of their owners has been stayed. This decision has been met with relief and joy from shop vendors who have promptly removed their nameplates. The court's order allows businesses to only display the type of food they offer, addressing privacy and discrimination concerns. Watch the enthusiastic reactions of the vendors as they celebrate the court’s intervention. #SupremeCourt #KanwarYatraEateriesName #EateriesOwnerName #MahuaMoitraPetition #KanwariyaYatra #LegalUpdate #CivilRights #FoodRegulations #PrivacyRights #CommunalHarmony #MahuaMoitra #AkhileshYadav #Discrimination #CourtOrder #FoodSafety #LegalIntervention #UttarPradesh #Uttarakhand ~PR.152~ED.103~GR.125~HT.96~

Credit: Oneindia    Duration: 03:07Published
SC Stays Kanwariya Route Diktat: No Need To Display Owners’ Names | Mahua Moitra, Akhilesh React [Video]

SC Stays Kanwariya Route Diktat: No Need To Display Owners’ Names | Mahua Moitra, Akhilesh React

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has stayed the directives requiring eateries on the Kanwar yatra route to display owners' names, stating they only need to indicate the type of food served. The decision came after petitions from various parties, including political commentator Apoorvanand, activist Aakar Patel, and TMC MP Mahua Moitra. The court's intervention alleviates concerns over potential communal and privacy issues. Mahua Moitra and Akhilesh Yadav have reacted to the decision, highlighting its importance for protecting civil liberties and preventing discrimination. #SupremeCourt #KanwarYatraEateriesName #EateriesOwnerName #MahuaMoitraPetition #KanwariyaYatra #LegalUpdate #CivilRights #FoodRegulations #PrivacyRights #CommunalHarmony #MahuaMoitra #AkhileshYadav #Discrimination #CourtOrder #FoodSafety #LegalIntervention #UttarPradesh #Uttarakhand ~PR.152~HT.318~GR.121~ED.141~

Credit: Oneindia    Duration: 06:17Published
Bangladesh Violent Protest: Supreme Court Scales Back Job Quota That Sparked Deadly Violence [Video]

Bangladesh Violent Protest: Supreme Court Scales Back Job Quota That Sparked Deadly Violence

Bangladesh’s Supreme Court has ordered a significant reduction in the country’s controversial quota system for government jobs, following nationwide protests and violent clashes that have resulted in numerous casualties. The new ruling stipulates that 93% of government jobs will now be allocated based on merit, with the remaining 7% reserved for relatives of veterans from Bangladesh’s 1971 war of independence and other specific categories. Previously, 30% of these jobs were reserved for war veterans' relatives. #BangladeshProtests #StudentUnrest #DhakaLockdown #QuotaReform #BangladeshProtestsLIVE #BangladeshProtestsViolent #BangladeshJobQuota #BangladeshSupremeCourt #SheikhHasina #BangladeshProtestNews #BangladeshNews ~HT.97~PR.152~ED.194~

Credit: Oneindia    Duration: 03:22Published
NEET-UG 2024 exam: Far Fetched To Say Leaked Papers Solved & Given 45 Minutes Before Exam: SC To NTA [Video]

NEET-UG 2024 exam: Far Fetched To Say Leaked Papers Solved & Given 45 Minutes Before Exam: SC To NTA

While hearing the NEET-UG 2024 case, the Supreme Court on Thursday (July 18) raised doubts over the stand of the Union and the National Testing Agency that the paper leak happened only about 45 minutes before the start of the exam in certain centres. ~PR.320~ED.101~

Credit: Oneindia    Duration: 03:01Published

Supreme court Supreme court Highest court in a jurisdiction

Supreme Court's Bail To Arvind Kejriwal | Key Details | What the Supreme Court Said | Watch [Video]

Supreme Court's Bail To Arvind Kejriwal | Key Details | What the Supreme Court Said | Watch

In this video, we discuss the Supreme Court's recent decision to grant bail to Arvind Kejriwal. We cover the key details of the ruling, what the Supreme Court had to say during the proceedings, and the implications of this decision for the Delhi Chief Minister and his political future. Don't miss our analysis of this significant development! #ArvindKejriwal #SupremeCourt #Bail #DelhiPolitics #Judiciary #LegalNews #PoliticalAnalysis #CurrentAffairs #IndianPolitics #Justice ~HT.97~ED.194~PR.274~

Credit: Oneindia    Duration: 03:02Published
Muslim clerics react to Supreme Court's big alimony order for Muslim women | Watch [Video]

Muslim clerics react to Supreme Court's big alimony order for Muslim women | Watch

The Supreme Court ruled Section 125 CrPC applies to all women, including divorced Muslim women. The Apex Court ruled that Muslim women can seek maintenance from husbands upon divorce. A divorced Muslim female can file a petition for maintenance from her husband, said the Supreme Court. Muslim clerics shared mixed views on the Supreme Court’s big alimony order for muslim women. One of the clerics said that SC must review its decision, while others said that this will help women. #MuslimClerics #SupremeCourt #AlimonyOrder #MuslimWomen #Reaction #LegalRuling #Judiciary #IslamicLaw #Women'sRights #India #Justice #FamilyLaw #News #Trending #WatchNow

Credit: Oneindia    Duration: 09:34Published

United States Department of Homeland Security United States Department of Homeland Security United States federal department

‘Cheatle Is Responsible’: Homeland Security Blasts Secret Service for Overlooking Security of Trump [Video]

‘Cheatle Is Responsible’: Homeland Security Blasts Secret Service for Overlooking Security of Trump

A failed assassination attempt on Donald Trump at a Pennsylvania rally exposed critical Secret Service failures. The bullet grazed Trump's ear, killing one and wounding two before the gunman was neutralized. Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas acknowledged the lapse, calling for an independent review. The incident raised serious questions about security protocols, especially as the shooter accessed a police staging area. This event has sparked congressional demands for investigation. #DonaldTrump #Trump2024 #TrumpAssassinationAttempt #Pennyslvania #TrumpAttack #AssassinationAttempt #DonaldTrumpnews #USElections #Worldnews #Oneindia #Oneindianews ~HT.178~PR.320~ED.155~GR.344~

Credit: Oneindia    Duration: 03:14Published
Border Arrests Fall Over 40% Since Biden Suspended Asylum Processing [Video]

Border Arrests Fall Over 40% Since Biden Suspended Asylum Processing

Border Arrests Fall Over 40% , Since Biden Suspended Asylum Processing. The Homeland Security Department made the announcement on June 26, NPR reports. . Average daily arrests that the Border Patrol has made over a week-long period have dropped below 2,400. That is a decrease of over 40% from before the president's proclamation went into effect on June 5. That is a decrease of over 40% from before the president's proclamation went into effect on June 5. However, arrests need to drop to the 1,500 mark before asylum processing can resume. Still, the current data marks the lowest number of arrests since Jan. 17, 2021, NPR reports. . Last week, President Biden touted a 25% decrease in border arrests since the order took effect, . which means they've dropped a lot more since then. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has called the executive order a "tremendous success.". We indeed have seen a tremendous success early on, and I should emphasize that it is early on in our implementation of the president’s proclamation and our accompanying regulation, Alejandro Mayorkas, to CNN. Mayorkas will address border enforcement efforts in Tuscon, Arizona, on June 26. The area has served as "the busiest corridor for illegal crossings" recently, NPR reports.

Credit: Wibbitz Top Stories    Duration: 01:31Published

Amy Coney Barrett Amy Coney Barrett US Supreme Court justice (born 1972)

Supreme Court Sides With Biden Administration in Social Media Case [Video]

Supreme Court Sides With Biden Administration in Social Media Case

Supreme Court Sides With Biden Administration , in Social Media Case. Attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, and other right-wing individuals, . Attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, and other right-wing individuals, . previously brought a lawsuit against the government, alleging that it had influenced what social media companies allow on their sites. In particular, plaintiffs in the case of Murthy v. Missouri questioned whether the Biden administration violated free speech protections amid the pandemic when social networks were instructed to remove COVID misinformation. In particular, plaintiffs in the case of Murthy v. Missouri questioned whether the Biden administration violated free speech protections amid the pandemic when social networks were instructed to remove COVID misinformation. On July 4, 2023, Louisiana Judge Terry Doughty agreed with the plaintiffs and restricted members of the Biden administration from interacting with social media companies in an attempt to moderate their content. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down the lower court's ruling by a vote of 6-3 on June 26, 'The Guardian' reports. . The plaintiffs, without any concrete link between their injuries and the defendants’ conduct, , Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion. ... ask us to conduct a review of the years-long communications between dozens of federal officials, across different agencies, with different social-media platforms, about different topics, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion. This court’s standing doctrine prevents us from ‘exercis[ing such] general legal oversight’ of the other branches of government, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion. Ultimately, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that the lower court "glossed over complexities in the evidence" and "also erred by treating the defendants, plaintiffs and platforms each as a unified whole.". Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented. Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented. For months, high-ranking government officials placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to suppress Americans’ free speech, Justice Samuel Alito, via dissenting opinion. The Court, however, shirks that duty and thus permits the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear, and think, Justice Samuel Alito, via dissenting opinion

Credit: Wibbitz Top Stories    Duration: 01:31Published

John Roberts John Roberts Chief Justice of the United States since 2005

Supreme Court Rules That Some Jan. 6 Defendants Were Improperly Charged [Video]

Supreme Court Rules That Some Jan. 6 Defendants Were Improperly Charged

Supreme Court Rules That , Some Jan. 6 Defendants, Were Improperly Charged. NPR reports that the United States Supreme Court voted to limit which defendants accused of taking part in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot can be charged by federal prosecutors. The decision also casts doubt on two out of the four felony counts in former President Donald Trump's election subversion indictment. According to conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled that the U.S. government must prove , “that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding.”. NPR reports that prosecutors relied on a key criminal statute to prosecute over 350 participants of the Capitol riot. The statute makes it a crime to alter or destroy official documents, or to otherwise obstruct or impede official proceedings. Roberts wrote that the statute was not meant to broaden the meaning of the law to make it a catchall provision. . The decision will impact other cases related to Jan. 6, many of which will have to be resentenced, retried or defendants will be released. . NYU law professor Ryan Goodman authored a study that found only 346 of the 1,417 people charged in connection with the Capitol riot were charged under the obstruction statute. The study also found that 71 people are still awaiting trial on the obstruction charge, but over half of them are also charged with another felony. NPR points out that if found guilty of other felony charges, the sentencing judge is still allowed to use the charge of obstruction to determine the length of their sentence.

Credit: Wibbitz Top Stories    Duration: 01:31Published
Supreme Court Rules Against SEC's Authority to Impose Fines [Video]

Supreme Court Rules Against SEC's Authority to Impose Fines

Supreme Court Rules , Against SEC's Authority, to Impose Fines. NPR reports that the United States Supreme Court recently voted 6-3 against the Securities and Exchange Commission's policy on fraudulent conduct. . NPR reports that the United States Supreme Court recently voted 6-3 against the Securities and Exchange Commission's policy on fraudulent conduct. . Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court's conservative majority, said the current rules deprive accused transgressors of their constitutional right to a jury trial. . Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court's conservative majority, said the current rules deprive accused transgressors of their constitutional right to a jury trial. . The SEC relies on administrative law judges (ALJ) to make legal conclusions in cases brought before the agency. The Supreme Court's decision has the potential to send ripples through dozens of agencies, from labor rights to energy regulation. The Court did exclude from its decision those agencies dealing with federal benefits, while some conservative justices wanted the ruling to go further. The three liberal justices in dissent blasted the decision by the majority. . The case was brought by a former conservative radio host and hedge fund manager, George Jarkesy, following an SEC fraud investigation. The case was brought by a former conservative radio host and hedge fund manager, George Jarkesy, following an SEC fraud investigation. An in-house evidentiary hearing fined Jarkesy $300,000, ordered him to pay back almost $700,000 in ill-gotten profits and barred him from the securities industry. Jarkesy argued that he was entitled to a jury trial held in a federal court and that Congress lacked the power to delegate such authority to the SEC. NPR reports that Jarkesy's case was supported by a number of conservative and business groups, and individuals such as Elon Musk. NPR reports that Jarkesy's case was supported by a number of conservative and business groups, and individuals such as Elon Musk

Credit: Wibbitz Top Stories    Duration: 01:31Published
Supreme Court Upholds Gun Ban for People Charged With Domestic Violence [Video]

Supreme Court Upholds Gun Ban for People Charged With Domestic Violence

Supreme Court Upholds Gun Ban , for People Charged With Domestic Violence. On June 21, the Supreme Court upheld a law that keeps people with domestic violence restraining orders against them from owning firearms, NBC News reports. . The vote was 8-1. Justice Clarence Thomas was the only one who dissented. . Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the Supreme Court's majority opinion, stating that since America was founded. "our nation's firearm laws have included provisions preventing individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms.". The provision in the latest case "fits comfortably within this tradition," Roberts wrote. . Attorney General Merrick Garland applauded the ruling, . saying that it "protects victims by keeping firearms out of the hands of dangerous individuals who pose a threat to their intimate partners and children.". Erich Pratt, senior VP of Gun Owners of America, said that while the man who brought the case to the Supreme Court, Zackey Rahimi, is a "dangerous individual,". the decision "will disarm others who have never actually committed any domestic violence."

Credit: Wibbitz Top Stories    Duration: 01:30Published

Related videos from verified sources

Gateway: Beyond the Headlines 1/30/24 [Video]

Gateway: Beyond the Headlines 1/30/24

Gateway: Beyond the Headlines 1/30/24 — Border convoy grows to 700,000 vehicles; Missouri AG may sue Biden; Supreme Court to hear free speech case; Musk’s Neuralink success; mysterious blob in..

Credit: RumblePublished
US District Court set to rule for Texas in razor wire case as connection to Ukraine War emerges! [Video]

US District Court set to rule for Texas in razor wire case as connection to Ukraine War emerges!

Fifth Circuit orders US District Court to hear Texas razor wire case on the merits; court expected to rule for Texas | Is there a connection between the Ukraine War and the Texas razor wire case? | Is..

Credit: RumblePublished
Did Texas Just Trigger a Civil War? [Video]

Did Texas Just Trigger a Civil War?

After the supreme court gave the Biden administration the green light to prevent border patrol from enforcing our laws, 25 states have now signaled that they support Texas' right to defend..

Credit: RumblePublished