Texas governor ignores Supreme Court ruling, adds more razor wire to border
Source: CBS
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is doubling down on his border initiatives after being dealt a blow from the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this week.
Texas and Abbott are making it no secret they’re putting in more razor wire at the southern border just days after the high court gave the go-ahead to the federal government to remove the wire.
In a lengthy statement, Abbott is reiterating arguments he’s cited before, asserting that the federal government has fallen short of its constitutional duties to protect the southern border.
He’s specifically citing the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3, which says, in part, “no state shall, without the consent of Congress, keep troops in time of peace unless actually invaded.”
Read more: https://www.cbs7.com/2024/01/26/texas-governor-ignores-supreme-court-ruling-adds-more-razor-wire-border/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Since Dobbs let states decide and not the federal government, who would do the ignoring? 
Especially if GQP gets the national ban they intend enforce. And we need to allow red state women to go to blue state clinics without prison time.
But I am just a man, why should I care? :
It wasn't a ruling. It was an order. (Like "It wasn't a novel. It was a graffiti."
Court of original jurisdiction said, "Sure, you want to cut the wire, go ahead, cut the wire."
Appellate court said, "Injunction. You can't cut."
SCOTUS said, "Injunction . What the appellate court said ... that's revoked." Why? Nobody said.
Which means nobody said. Full stop. Stop fully.
https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/01/court-allows-border-patrol-to-cut-texas-razor-wire-along-rio-grande/
In a brief, unsigned order, the justices lifted an order by a federal appeals court that had barred Border Patrol agents from interfering with the wire except in medical emergencies. Four justices – Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh – indicated that they would have denied the Biden administration’s request and allowed the lower court’s order to remain in place
That is all. The thousands of other words are spin, interpretation, imputations, assumptions, assertions, claims and other evidence-baseless utterances.
I would happily link to the published order because original documents squash all the bloviation about what the original documents say, but https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/ordersofthecourt/24 indicates that the SCOTUS website is a wee bit out of date. SCOTUS does ride a large-ish lake of bureaucracy, after all.
