High Court finalizes end of 2024 immigration rule

The Supreme Court allowed a settlement between the state of Texas and the federal government to take effect, eliminating a 2024 immigration regulation. The court issued its decision without noted dissents, leaving a lower court ruling in place.

The removed rule, adopted by the Biden administration, outlined how immigration judges could temporarily pause deportation proceedings. This practice, known as administrative closure, applied to cases where migrants were pursuing other federal relief. With the rule gone, that specific procedure for holding certain deportation cases is no longer codified in federal regulations.

Texas initiated the legal challenge in June, arguing the rule lacked proper legal authority. The Department of Justice aligned with the state, asking the presiding judge to vacate the rule and prevent similar future regulations. Opponents claimed the two parties colluded, noting they worked together despite being formal adversaries in the lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor, a George W. Bush appointee, granted the request on the same day the Justice Department made it. The swift action drew criticism from groups arguing the process bypassed standard legal checks.

In August, Baltimore, New Haven, and Columbus, joined with the advocacy group Centro Legal de la Raza, sought to intervene in the case. These cities, which have large immigrant populations, argued that eliminating the rule could lead to deportations that reduce their tax revenues, thereby giving them legal standing. O'Connor rejected that argument, finding the cities had not demonstrated sufficient injury.

On October 9, the cities and the advocacy group asked the Supreme Court to temporarily block the lower court's judgment while their appeal proceeded. They accused Texas and the federal government of engaging in egregious collusion. Federal lawyers countered that the challengers lacked standing because they had not shown the concrete injury required for federal court review. The High Court's recent decision leaves the Biden-era rule eliminated while the dispute over the underlying process continues.