What you need to know to understand this case: A Quick Geography Lesson
Texas shares a land border with Mexico. However, there is also a river running through some of this border called the Rio Grande. This river is often used as a route for Mexicans attempting to migrate to America.Â
Eagle Pass is a city in Texas that borders the Rio Grande. Inside Eagle Pass is a park called Shelby Park. Due to its location, it is not unusual to see Mexican immigrants arriving in Shelby Park through the river.Â
What you need to know to understand this case: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection is an extension to the executive branch that oversees immigration and border issues. Within this agency is their law enforcement team called “Border Patrol.” Their primary mission is to detect and prevent the illegal entry of individuals into the United States.
Because they are an extension of the executive branch, that makes them part of the Biden-Harris Administration and, therefore, responsible for following the orders of that administration.
What you need to know to understand this case: The Constitution and The Supreme Court
The United States Supreme Court’s job is to interpret the Constitution as cases are presented to them. Let’s look at the case of Tinker v. Des Moines for an example. All you need to know about this case is that school officials prevented students from wearing black wristbands during school hours to protest the Vietnam War. The students sued, saying the school’s actions were a violation of their First Amendment Rights. The Supreme Court ended up ruling in favor of these students. This decision, therefore, established that students in school were still protected under the First Amendment, even though the Constitution doesn’t directly say that. That is how the Supreme Court interpreted and further specified the First Amendment.Â
In the case of immigration, no part of the Constitution specifically addresses whether immigration laws are under state or federal control. However, through previous Supreme Court cases, a precedent* has been established, giving the federal government control over all immigration issues, including border patrol.
*Precedent: a previous case or legal decision that may be or must be followed in subsequent similar cases.
What you need to know to understand this case: Greg Abbott vs. the Biden-Harris Administration
Since its creation, Border Patrol has been in charge of standing guard of the U.S.-Mexico border. Whether or not they put up physical barriers at the border (fences, walls, etc) is up to the discretion of the current president and NOT the governments of border states*.
*The border states include Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California
Greg Abbott, governor of Texas, is notorious for his highly conservative ideology, which includes strong anti-immigration rhetoric. Because of this, he has made many news headlines, drawing attention to his radical border protection policies. Most recently, Abbott fenced off parts of Shelby Park without permission from the mayor of Eagle Pass or Border Patrol. These are barbed-wire fences that run down into the Rio Grande water (i.e., there’s no swimming under it).
Joe Biden and his administration have been more lenient on immigration than previous presidents. This is reflected in more relaxed policies regarding the U.S.-Mexico border, which presents a stark contrast to the previous presidential administration. Since Greg Abbott is in such passionate disagreement with the immigration policies created by the Biden-Harris administration, he has decided to take border protection into his own hands, ignoring federal law. He was recently quoted saying this during a state legislator campaign:
“We are not allowing Border Patrol on that property anymore.”
Greg Abbott
What Happened?
On Friday, January 12th, 2024, Mexican citizens Victerma de la Sancha Cerros (33), her daughter, Yorlei Rubi (10), and son, Jonathan AgustĂn (8) attempted to illegally cross the Mexican border using the Rio Grande. That evening, Border Patrol was informed of three migrants in distress. These migrants were de la Sancha Cerros and her children, who eventually drowned in the Rio Grande.Â
This is where the story gets particularly confusing. Usually, when Border Patrol sees migrants in distress, they are supposed to help them. However, when Border Patrol attempted to enter Shelby Park, Texas officials allegedly “physically barred” them. I say allegedly because this, and all following allegations of negligence against Texas, was completely denied by Abbott. In fact, he posted this to X two days after the deaths:
“When BP requested access to river the drownings had already occurred & found in MX. The fact is the deaths are b/c of Biden’s Open Border magnet.”
Greg Abbott on X
Since the deaths, there has been ongoing discourse between the Biden-Harris Administration and the Texas governor on who is at fault. In sum, the Biden-Harris Administration (i.e., U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Department of Homeland Security) is claiming that the Texas Military Department is responsible for the entire situation because they are not allowed to fence off the border without executive permission or prevent Border Patrol from doing their one and only job: patrolling the border. Texas officials call all the accusations “wholly inaccurate” because the migrants were already dead before Border Patrol requested access.Â
Now, did Texas officials actually prevent Border Patrol agents from entering the park? I can’t tell you for sure because I wasn’t there. But, what I can tell you is, if true, that action is illegal. It would be very abnormal for Texas to just outright admit to it.Â
What is even weirder, though, is the argument Texas is using to defend itself. They don’t care what time Victerma de la Sancha Cerros and her children died. In fact, no one seems to really care about their deaths at all. The problem is that Texas made it impossible for Border Patrol agents to patrol the border. In my opinion, I think Abbott was fully aware of his illicit actions and just didn’t care.Â
What Are The Implications? (in my opinion)
At first glance, it may seem like the problem presented by this situation revolves around the deaths of Victerma, Yorlei Rubi, and Jonathan AgustĂn de la Sancha Cerros. That, however, is not fully true. After doing research on this story, the only involved party that seemed to actually care about the death of the de la Sancha Cerros family deaths was the Mexican government. The Texas Military Department, Biden-Harris Administration, and American news media are more concerned with the dispute between the Texas National Guard and U.S. Border Patrol and its implications.Â
There is no denying that the issue of who has control over the border is very important. However, I am disgusted by how little consideration has been given to the victims. The way I see it, an even bigger implication can be deciphered from this tragic case: the politicians in this country have a serious lack of empathy. If they cared about anything other than who gets to play defense against the illegal immigrants, they would notice the number of preventable deaths occurring at our border. I’m not arguing for a full open border policy; that’s a bigger conversation for another time. All I would like to see is these politicians come together and create a solution that shows me our country does care about the lives of people who, at the end of the day, are just trying to make a better life for themselves.
There wasn’t much information in the articles I read about the de la Sancha Cerros family. I’m sure they have their own unique story they won’t ever get to tell. May they rest in peace.