The best way to deal with the illegal immigration crisis is three words, enforce the law. First up, though, is the crisis, the Biden border crisis, which is, I think, kind of really, maybe, I hate to use this phrase because everyone in Washington likes to say inflection point, right, where maybe this week things have changed, maybe for the better in terms of the border debate, where things didn’t seem to be moving one way or the other in terms of addressing the crisis caused solely by President Biden’s refusal to enforce and apply immigration law.

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again, the best way to deal with the illegal immigration crisis is three words. Enforce the law. We don’t need new laws. We just need to enforce the laws on the books. And the president should exercise the discretion he already has under the law in our us constitution to protect America from this invasion, as opposed to misusing his authorities, spending money to aid and abet the invasion.

And in response to this lawlessness on the border, states like Texas have had to take action, and I think too late in some respects, but better late than never. And Governor Abbot has ordered his border be more secure down there. They’ve placed barbed wire, I think it’s, what’s it called, concertina wire, along the border. And the Biden administration erupted because they want an open border. They don’t want the states to provide barriers and protect themselves from the invasion because they’re on the side of the invaders.

They want these folks to come across the border, and then they use your money to move them into your hometown or to big cities across America. And so there had been a big legal fight that was going on in Texas, and then in the Fifth Circuit, which is the federal circuit of the pellet judges that oversees Texas and the feds have been winning, more or less, if I recall correctly.

And so they issued this injunction that allowed the Biden administration to come in and cut the wire to enable further the invasion. And the Supreme Court was asked to intervene by Texas, and the Supreme Court refused to, by vote of five to four. It was a decision that had not virtually no, had no explanation as to why the Supreme Court didn’t want to intervene here. But it was five four.

Amy Comey Barrett and Chief Justice Roberts joined the three liberals to essentially allow the federal government to come in and cut the wire. Now, what does it mean for Texas? Although the Supreme Court didn’t say what its views were on the merits, it was just about whether there’d be an injunction stopping the government from the Biden regime. From doing what they wanted to do. But certainly it doesn’t auger well for this fight in the future before the Supreme Court.

Now, specifically, Texas has said they’re still going know, keep on trying to protect themselves under the Constitution and such, and I’ll get there. I’ll discuss that a little bit more. But in the meantime, the left is going crazy because they’ve been exposed as a result of the Supreme Court decision. So this was an adverse decision for those of us who want the border secure. And I don’t think I need to, for practical purposes, get into the debate of whether it was right or not, whether there should have been an injunction.

All I know is that Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas were on the side of those who thought the federal government shouldn’t be able to cut the wire as this case was pending. And to me, I don’t know about you, but when Justice Thomas and Justice Alito in the least are on the side of an issue, you can reliably count me on the side of wherever they are. And so now there’s a big debate, right? What’s going to happen in Texas? And in response, I keep on calling him Speaker Abbott.

He’s not Speaker Abbot. He’s governor. Abbot issued a statement as to where he is on this. Let’s get the statement out here. Stated January 24, the federal government has broken the compact between the United States and the states. The executive branch of the United States has a constitutional duty to enforce federal laws protecting states, including immigration laws on the books right now. President Biden has refused to enforce these laws and has even violated them.

The result is that he has smashed records for illegal immigration despite having been put on notice in a series of letters, one of which I delivered to him by hand. President Biden has ignored Texas’s demand that he perform his constitutional duties. President Biden has violated his oath to faithfully execute immigration laws enacted by Congress. Instead of prosecuting immigrants for the federal crime of illegal entry, President Biden has sent his lawyers into federal courts to sue Texas for taking action to secure the border.

President Biden has instructed his agencies to ignore federal states statutes that mandate the detention of illegal immigrants. The effect is to illegally allow their enlas parole into the United States, meaning they just get let into the country by wasting taxpayer dollars. To tear open Texas’s border security infrastructure. Biden has enticed illegal immigrants away from the 28 legal entry points along the state’s southern border. Bridges where no one bridge border dash bridges where no one drowns.

They’re safer to cross there, too, and into the dangerous waters of the Rio Grande. Under President Biden’s lawless border policies, more than 6 million illegal immigrants have crossed our southern border in just three years. That is more than the population of 33 different states in this country. This illegal refusal to protect the states has inflicted unprecedented harm on the people all across the United States. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and other visionaries who wrote the US Constitution foresaw that the states shall not be left to the mercy of a lawless president who does nothing to stop external threats like cartels smuggling millions of illegal immigrants across the border.

This is why the framers included both article four, section four, which promises that a federal government, quote, shall protect each state against invasion, and article one, section ten, clause three, which acknowledges the state’s sovereign interest in protecting their borders. And he cites a Supreme Court brief there. The failure of the Biden administration, and this is, I think, the most important part of the post here, the failure of the Biden administration to fulfill the duties imposed by article four.

Section four has triggered article one, clause ten, section ten, clause three, which reserves to this state the right of self defense. For these reasons, I have already declared an invasion under sect. Article one, section ten, clause three, to invoke Texas constitutional authority to defend and protect itself. That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary. The Texas National Guard, the Texas Department of Public Safety, and other Texas personnel are acting on that authority as well as state law to secure Texas border.

So what does that mean? It means he’s going to try to keep on protecting the border. And the Supreme Court decision, like no other decision, as I said, it was an adverse decision, just lighted a fire within the american public and highlighted in a dramatic fashion that this Biden administration, which is supposed to be securing the border, is taking steps to undo efforts to secure that border. And this on top of, I think, the revelations in the New Hampshire primary, I know it was Republicans, but there are a lot of independents and Democrats, as we’ve heard, who evidently participated in that process.

And they were all polled, and I shouldn’t say all of them were polled, but some were asked questions in a statistically valid way to ensure a response that speaks for the voting public, at least in New Hampshire. And the number one concern was illegal immigration. This is a New Hampshire. This isn’t in Texas. This is in New Hampshire. Now, of course, they’ve got border issues up north that the media want to ignore as well.

But the point is that illegal immigration is a major issue for the voting public. 6 million people coming across the border. I mean, if the public isn’t upset and nervous about that, then maybe the country truly would be lost. But the public is upset about it and want it stopped. And so now Congress and establishment Washington doesn’t know what to do. And what the left is trying to do is suggest that because Governor Abbot and officials in Texas are insisting that they still have the right to protect the border because that Supreme Court decision didn’t tell Texas, you have to stop it, just told the Biden administration what it’s allowed to do or allowed it to proceed to cut wire where it wants, in theory it looks like.

But Texas still has steps it can take under law. And what’s the response of the left to deploy the military against Texas, to take military action? Have Biden seize the National Guard, even though Texas hasn’t done anything outside the law. But this is what the left is about. They want to jail their enemies. And as soon as you object to anything they want, they want to bring the military down on you.

They’re looking for a tinneman square in Texas. If they had their left, and I’m telling you, this anti american left, it will be the death of the country. It’s not going to be, could be the death of the country. It will be the death of the country unless our institutions of government and law and civic life don’t confront and stop the abuses. And this includes the destruction of our border, the destruction of our sovereignty, destruction of our nation that is being caused by this unprecedented wave of humanity never seen before, not in american history, in the history of humanity, into the United States.

And as I highlighted in response to the Supreme Court decision, the Supreme Court made a political decision. I think the decision not to provide relief to Texas was a political decision on the border crisis. And Americans are less safe, and Americans know they’re less safe. That’s why there’s been this overwhelming outrage and show of public support for Texas’s position. Now the question is, what’s going to be done? What can we and should we expect from our politicians in the current crisis? I’ve already told you repeatedly, and I will tell you again, because it can happen as soon as tomorrow, whenever Congress is next in session.

The House and the Senate can defund the Biden border invasion. If they don’t want Biden to cut the razor wire, if they don’t want the Biden to tear down border security, if they don’t want Biden to aid in abet illegal immigration and basically help foreign nationals invade the United States. With your tax dollars, they can stop the funding in a, you know, the Democrats have their position. It’s well known.

Republicans pretend to be, most Republicans pretend to be against all of this. And they’re all outraged in Congress, especially given the Supreme Court decision. So the same House Republicans, including Speaker Johnson, who pushed through a deal to fully fund the border invasion last week, this week is outraged that the border invasion is happening. I don’t know how you square those two positions. Maybe I’m just some dumb, not, I’m just not sophisticated enough for Washington because I can’t figure out how you can be opposed to the Biden border invasion and then when push comes to shove, you fully fund it in these continuing resolutions and such.

Now the good news is, or I don’t know if it’s good news because I don’t know how it’s going to turn out. But what’s interesting is that the Senate has been going through secret negotiations, and whenever negotiations on big matters are conducted in secret in Congress, it means bad guys are up to no good and they’re coming up with awful policy. And so the thinking was there’s this desire for additional Ukraine aid, aid for Israel and aid for other leftist priorities.

And I don’t mean Israel Ukraine, I mean just other leftist priorities because all that aid is coupled with funding the left all the time. All the time. And so what conservatives were thinking was, well, if they need that or if that’s must pass legislation because some of them support aid for Ukraine and Israel in various ways, then if that’s a must pass piece of legislation, let’s have a must pass.

If we’re going to be supporting the national security of Israel and Ukraine, we should at least put a priority also on our national security by securing our border. So it turns out that there’s been this secret negotiation between the establishment republican wing and the Senate and Democrats, and the plans have been leaked, more or less. That would, as best I understand it, allow certain hundreds of thousands of people at least to get amnesty, enshrine in law that it’s okay for millions of people to cross the border illegally before anything’s done about it, effectively making it easier for people who abuse our asylum system to work.

So all of that is kind of blown up, right? Because all of a sudden Republicans don’t want any part of it, or at least a significant number in the Senate don’t. So no one knows what to do. So it’s terribly confusing up there. It’s great to watch because I want confusion and failures in legislation when the legislation is designed to advance the destruction of the country. I got relatively.

Obviously, we all have different views as to particular pieces of legislation, but I’ve got this basic view that if a piece of legislation is going to destroy America, I’m opposed to it. And you can be sure that any border security bill that would get through the Senate wasn’t going to address the issue and would just kick the can down the road as the invasion continues in numbers never seen before in the history of man.

And the other issue, as I said, is the continued funding of this by Congress. The continuing resolution is through the beginning of March, so there’s another month of this. So it’s up to you to ask your members of Congress what they’re going to do to defund this invasion. Either it’s important or not. And if it’s important, dear leader, dear reader, dear listener, dear voter, ladies and gentlemen, then you should call your members of Congress and let them know what you think at 2022-5312-1202-2531-21 but getting back to Texas, though, and what the state governor there, and the state is highlighting there, is what can the states do to protect their citizenry? And Governor Abbot referenced the United States Constitution and two key clauses in it, and the first clause is what is called the guarantee clause, which is that the president and the federal government have a positive obligation to guarantee a republican form of government to the states.

Now, what the argument is that you can’t have a republican form of government if you’re under invasion from millions of aliens. And this is the language. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government and shall protect each of them against invasion and on application of the legislature or of the executive when the legislature cannot be convened against domestic violence. So that second part, I would submit, would require the federal government to provide troops to end the invasion.

And what rights does the state have as a result of that guarantee clause? I think that’s unexplored. I’m sure there are some cases out there that explore it, but I think it’s largely unexplored. But it highlights the obligations at least the federal government have that aren’t being met. And when you couple it with the other clause, which I think is extremely interesting and I’ve been highlighting for years now, what’s the other clause? I had so much paper here, there’s so much corruption going on.

The paper’s overwhelming. Oh, there it is. No state shall without the consent of Congress. You guys should read it. It’s easier for me to read the paper than the screen. No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops or ships in war, of war, in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state or with the foreign power, or engage in war unless actually invaded or imminent danger, as will not admit of delay.

So I interpret that to mean, and so does the governor of Texas, that in matters of invasion, they have sovereignty, especially in a situation, as the other clause I mentioned reveal, where the invasion isn’t being not only stopped by the feds, but effectively encouraged by the feds. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. This is why there are clauses like this in this. The states don’t commit to being destroyed and being able to do nothing in the face of an invasion that is either enabled or occurring in real time.

And so that compact clause. I call it the compact clause. I would submit that the states that are interested in this issue and concerned about the destruction of America enter into a compact, a common defense compact, where the national guards and other appropriate personnel and resources are deployed to the border in places like Texas. I don’t know if Arizona would participate. I suspect California wouldn’t participate because it’s run by the open borders left and stop the invasion and repel the invasion.

I’ve seen many governors, I think 25 or 26 states, have said they stand by Texas. Well, that’s good, but it may not be sufficient as I’m describing it. Right. Are they willing to enter into a compact and provide national guard and other support to Texas to repel the invasion? I think that’s the question. And so in addition to calling Congress and asking what are they going to do to defund the border crisis, you should be asking your governors, what are they going to do to repel the invasion? Are they going to put troops on the ground, National Guard troops on the ground, to help our fellow citizens in Texas protect their home? And, of course, we get the benefit of all that, too, those of us who don’t live in Texas, because we’re better protected if the border is protected by them.

So call your governor, ask them what they’re doing. Some of you may know what the governor is doing, but you should let them know what you think anyway, politely but firmly on this key issue. Now, Judicial watch, in the meantime, will continue to expose what’s going on, educate Americans as to what’s going on. I mean, we’ve been fighting this battle. I was thinking about this the other day I think our first case on immigration was probably 23 years ago.

I’ve been here 25 years, believe it or not. And we were helping out some little old ladies in Pasadena who were objecting and protesting, I think I’d say little old ladies in Pasadena. Not literally, they were from Pasadena, but they were from California. And they were protesting, I think, identification cards for aliens in California, either in Sacramento, I think it was in Sacramento and these antifa types. And it was antifa back then.

You have to remember there’s a mexican separatist movement at slon that has been active in California for a long time, extremes, leftists who want to destroy America and give part of it back to Mexico. So that crowd, that extreme leftist crowd came up and beat up these elderly folks who were, like I said, little old ladies from, you know, with their signs outside the local government office. So we represented them.

And since then we’ve tried to sue to stop sanctuary cities. We participated in these big battles in Arizona over their efforts to control and protect their state from illegal immigration. Of course, we got awful Supreme Court decisions from the court there that said, know, the states had to take a backseat to the federal government on all matters related to immigration. Now, I know that’s not literally what they read, but that was practically what happened.

So I don’t know if the courts are going to be here if there’s a president who’s out of control like this because they’ve been so deferential to the feds on these matters. And what’s the other thing that can be? You know, they can remove Biden from office. I don’t understand why impeachment isn’t including the abandonment of his oath as it respects to immigration law and this clause, as we say, to guarantee a republican form of government to the states and to protect the border, our safety and security.

So they should escalate impeachment to include the Biden border. Cris, I mean, there’s this video. I retweeted it earlier this week or today. Look at this mean, that’s the United States of America where that’s happening. All of this because of conscious decision making. This isn’t like a mistake. This is the known results, foreseeable results of policies that are being voluntarily pursued by this president in contravention of his oath and the law.

And if that type of failure to conduct yourself in office to protect America isn’t impeachable as our founders intended, because the abdication of your oath of office like this, your duties and mean you can effectively leave your office. Right. In terms of the rule of law. And the impeachment is to check on that. Now was he going to be removed from, by the Senate as a result of the Senate trial? I don’t know, but everyone should go on record.

So either this is a priority or it’s not. If it’s a priority, you use every tool available to you under the Constitution to protect America. That’s what I think about the border invasion. So what are your action items? Get the message out there. We don’t need to do anything at the border other than enforce the law. We don’t need immigration reform, meaning amnesty. We need to defund Biden’s border invasion.

We need other states to stand with Texas, literally through agreements under the Constitution that protect Texas and the rest of America and the several states from invasion, because you don’t have to be on the border to be invaded if Biden is moving millions of people into your jurisdiction. So those of you up north, Biden isn’t forgetting about you. He’s sending aliens there contrary to the constitution and his oath of office.

You’re being invaded, too. So talk to your governors, talk to Congress, defund, enforce the law, impeach Biden, and, of course, support judicial watch because we stand with you on the rule of law, on immigration. We’ve been fighting this battle for decades, and we’re not going to allow Republicans and Democrats, because both parties do it, to lie to you or blow smoke in your ear as to what’s possible and what they can and can’t do to fix the cris.

Because there are a lot of folks in this town who if Republicans say, oh, this is what we’re going to do, this is the plan. And even though they know it’s not going to work, they just sign on to it because they’re part of the party. That’s not what we do at Judicial Watch. We’re independent. So when Speaker Johnson funds a border invasion, we’re going to call him out on it.

When he says and does the right thing, we’ll promote him. When Democrats say and do the right thing, we’ll promote them. It’s about protecting the country, not partisan interests. Thanks for watching. Don’t forget to hit that subscribe button and like our video down below. .

See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.