Posted on

Horowitz: And the state with the most lenient gun laws is … California!

California is aiming to adopt the most lenient gun laws in the nation. You see, leftists hate guns, but they hate incarceration even more. It’s become clear that nearly every violent criminal violates firearms laws and is often caught by police illegally possessing firearms as a felon or even assaulting people with a firearm. Dropping the hammer on all those people and locking them up would prevent most violent crime in this country. But it would also add to those “dreaded” incarceration numbers. Which is why leftists are now trying to do to firearms charges what they did to drugs: de facto decriminalization.

Many Southern and Mountain states now allow constitutional carry, whereby non-felons don’t have to get permits to carry firearms. But in California and other blue areas, you could get caught assaulting someone with a gun and get parole instead of jail time. Or you could violate your parole with felony possession and not get punished. Talk about gun rights!

Los Angeles has experienced a 111% increase in homicides during the period of January 1, 2021, to May 21, 2021, relative to the same time last year. The Biden administration continues to blame it on increased gun sales, as if murderers go through the legal process. But Michele Hanisee, president of the Association of Los Angeles Deputy District Attorneys, has the real culprit for the increased gun violence. In a piece on her union’s website, Hanisee identifies the following trend:

  • George Gascon, the current district attorney of Los Angeles County, refuses to enforce California’s “10-20-life – use a gun and you’re done” law. Under California Penal Code §12022.53, a criminal could get an extra 10-year sentencing enhancement for commission of a felony with a gun, another 20 for discharging it, and 25 to life for causing great bodily injury. There has been a 70% drop in enhancement filings under Gascon compared to his predecessor, who lost office last year.
  • Democrats in the State Assembly introduced AB 1509, which would abolish the enhancements altogether. The bill is sickeningly called the Anti-Racism Sentencing Reform Act. The result of this bill will be the deaths of thousands more black victims of homicide.
  • In 2017, Governor Brown already signed into law SB 620, a bill that allows judges to dismiss firearms enhancements even after they have been found true by a jury. This bill was supported by the ACLU, which will never lift a finger to defend the self-defense rights of law-abiding citizens.
  • These same politicians defend diversion programs that enable criminals to continue to possess guns. Last year, Virginia Democrats introduced a bill to allow some juvenile murderers to continue possessing and transporting firearms.

Thus, the same people trying to ban firearms and put up roadblocks for people with no criminal record who go through the legal system are trying to do everything in their power to ensure that violent felons can keep their guns and even commit crimes with guns and not face consequences. The same people who want to “red flag” gun owners they deem suspicious without due process want to overlook gun crimes with the ultimate red flags: those who commit violence with firearms. As such, the only successful deterrent on guns is applied to those who need them for protection against the gun felons coddled by California Democrats! So much for “criminal justice reform” being solely about “nonviolent, low-level offenses.”

So many of the murders in this country are committed by these very career criminals who are paroled rather than imprisoned for gun charges. In a high-profile murder in Chicago earlier this month, Frank Harris is accused of murdering 73-year-old Vietnam War veteran Keith Cooper during a carjacking. Could this murder have been avoided? You bet. Harris was arrested last year for armed carjacking, yet he got probation and zero jail time. He already had an outstanding warrant for driving a stolen car when he allegedly murdered Cooper. And by the way, Keith Cooper was black. Indeed, the anti-incarceration agenda is the ultimate form of racism, because the body count resulting from leaving these criminals on the streets is overwhelmingly black.

The left can deflect all they want about taking away guns from law-abiding citizens, but there is zero evidence that law-abiding purchases are fueling the crime bubble. Earlier this month, researchers at the UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program studied all the gun purchases from March 2018 through July 2020, the preceding two years before crime began to explode across the country. They found zero evidence of causation between increased gun sales and the rise in violent crime. The study concluded that “despite concomitant increases in firearm purchasing and firearm violence nationally, the magnitude of the increase in purchasing at the state-level did not explain the magnitude of the increase in non-domestic firearm violence.”

Thus, gun control is to violence what lockdowns and masks are to COVID. The real solution is to treat the problem of crime by locking up the gun felons, just like we should treat COVID by actually giving safe and effective anti-inflammatory drugs to those who get the virus, not indiscriminately locking down everyone. And much like with the virus, where we can just mitigate the symptoms instead of stopping its existence, we will not stop the proliferation of guns, just deter the harm done by those who abuse them.

Tamping down gun sales will only succeed in ensuring the right people don’t have guns to protect themselves from the wrong people who are now out on the streets despite a history of gun violence. And we thought conservatives took the words “shall not be infringed” to an extreme!

Posted on

Postal workers’ union opposes Biden’s plan to mandate vaccines for federal employees

Ahead of President Joe Biden’s expected announcement of a new requirement for federal employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19, the AFL-CIO-affiliated American Postal Workers Union said Wednesday it opposes vaccine mandates.

“Maintaining the health and safety of our members is of paramount importance. While the APWU leadership continues to encourage postal workers to voluntarily get vaccinated, it is not the role of the federal government to mandate vaccinations for the employees we represent,” the union said in a statement.

“Issues related to vaccinations and testing for COVID-19 in the workplace must be negotiated with the APWU. At this time the APWU opposes the mandating of COVID-19 vaccinations in relation to U.S. postal workers.”

Various news outlets reported Wednesday that Biden will require federal employees to show that they’ve been vaccinated or be forced to undergo regular COVID-19 testing to keep their jobs. Speaking to reporters that day, Biden said a federal vaccine mandate was under consideration and “if you’re not vaccinated, you’re not nearly as smart as I thought you were.”

“We have a pandemic because of the unvaccinated, and they’re sowing enormous confusion. And the more we learn — the more we learn about this virus and the Delta variation, the more we have to be worried and concerned,” said Biden. “And only one thing we know for sure: If those other hundred million people got vaccinated, we’d be in a very different world.”

Mandates, though enormously unpopular with the American people, have in recent weeks been discussed by government and public health officials as the only means of ensuring enough Americans get vaccinated against COVID to slow the spread of the highly contagious Delta variant.

According to the New York Times vaccine tracker, 57.6% of Americans eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine (age 12 and up) have been fully vaccinated, while 66.8% have received at least one vaccine dose. Public health officials say 70% to 90% of Americans need to be vaccinated before the U.S. will reach the level of herd immunity necessary to end the pandemic.

However, many Americans remain hesitant to take the vaccines and say nothing will persuade them to get vaccinated. Some are concerned about the risks of possible side effects and the fact that the FDA technically has not approved any of the vaccines.

The various COVID-19 vaccines widely used in the U.S. have received emergency approval from the Food and Drug Administration during the pandemic. Though more than 338 million doses of COVID-19 vaccine have been administered in the U.S. and coronavirus cases have plummeted, the FDA has yet to fully approve the vaccines.

Now, with cases rising again, physicians and scientists are urging the FDA to speedily approve the vaccines, noting that their widespread use has effectively reduced severe COVID-19 cases (those that put people in the hospital) with extremely rare instances of side effects. FDA approval could mean, however, that businesses and state governments will feel comfortable mandating vaccination for their employees.

Posted on

‘We need to put them in a car and drive them to get that vaccine in their arm.’ – Governor Cuomo states his mission to vaccinate New Yorkers

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is on a mission to get citizens vaccinated. In this clip, Pat Gray and Jeff Fisher reacted to Cuomo’s plan of action and likened it to a mobster movie.

During a press conference, Cuomo said that authorities would “have to get in those communities…knock on those doors…convince people, and put them in a car and drive them to get that vaccine in their arm.”

“That is the mission,” Cuomo added.

Pat questioned Governor Cuomo for having the nerve to tell New Yorkers how to manage their health after the health-related scandals Cuomo himself faced during the pandemic.

Pat compared Cuomo’s mission to something from a mobster movie like “The Godfather” rather than public policy. Watch the clip to hear more from Pat. Can’t watch? Download the podcast here.

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat’s biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Posted on

Liberal journalist: There is ‘no good reason’ only citizens can vote

A guest columnist for the New York Times argued this week that “there is no good reason you should have to be a citizen to vote.”

According to the Times, the essay is “part of a series exploring bold ideas to revitalize and renew the American experiment.”

Atossa Araxia Abrahamian, a New York-based progressive journalist and former senior editor of the Nation, claimed in an opinion piece Wednesday that “it’s time for Democrats to radically expand the electorate.”

How? First by granting permanent legal residents the right to vote. Why? Because, according to Abrahamian, they contribute as much to the country as any natural-born citizen.

“Nearly 15 million people living legally in the United States, most of whom contribute as much as any natural-born American to this country’s civic, cultural and economic life, don’t have a say in matters of politics and policy because we — resident foreign nationals, or ‘aliens’ as we are sometimes called — cannot vote,” Abrahamian wrote.

According to her, the non-citizens who ought to be able to vote include “people with green cards, people here on work visas, and those who arrived in the country as children and are still waiting for permanent papers.”

A permanent legal resident herself, Abrahamian argued that “expanding the franchise in this way would give American democracy new life, restore immigrants’ trust in government and send a powerful message of inclusion to the rest of the world.”

She casts it as an inspiring message of unity. But for those concerned with diluting the franchise, it is more than fair to wonder whether granting the right to vote to permanent legal residents is only the beginning. It’s not hard to imagine how, after the franchise is expanded to include permanent residents, it could easily be expanded again and again.

Notwithstanding, the U.S. has adopted laws permitting only citizens to vote for a reason. Becoming a citizen “should mean something,” argued the New York Post Editorial Board in 2020:

An immigrant’s affirmative decision to become a citizen is a vital acceptance of duties as well as privileges.

“I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty,” reads the oath of allegiance for the newly naturalized. And “I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic” and “bear true faith and allegiance to the same,” including military service and other “work of national importance” as required by law.

The solemn oath is not one that someone should take lightly. It aims to isolate one’s allegiance to the United States alone, over and above all foreign allegiances, in most cases.

That is a notion that Abrahamian clearly rejects. The journalist — who reportedly holds Swiss, Canadian, and Iranian citizenship — is also the author of a 2015 book titled, “The Cosmopolites: The Coming Global Citizen.

According to a summary posted online, in the book, Abrahamianan interviews scores of so-called “cosmopolites,” or “citizens of the world,” to promote what she sees as an “increasingly fluid, borderless world.”

Posted on

Actor Michael Rapaport rips Fauci & Co. over mixed messages on vaccines, masks: ‘Am I a hero or a super spreader? … Figure this s**t out!’

Actor and comedian Michael Rapaport took Dr. Anthony Fauci and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to task over what he suggests is confusing advice as it pertains to COVID-19 vaccinations and mask-wearing.

What are the details?

Rapaport made the cutting — and profane — remarks in a now-viral Twitter video.

He said, “I just watched Tony Fauci and CNN and Fox tell me that people with the vaccine — vaccinated people — are now spreading the coronavirus. A couple of weeks ago, couple of days ago, I was … yes, I’m vaccinated … ‘Be a hero, be vaccinated!’ I went from being a hero because I’m vaccinated, and now you motherf***ers are calling me a superspreader? I ain’t no f***in’ super spreader. Figure this s**t out!”

Rapaport
tweeted the video, and captioned it, “Am I a Hero or a Super Spreader?”

At the time of this reporting, the video has been viewed more than 485,000 times.

Content warning: Rough language:

What else?

This isn’t the first time Rapaport has gone on an
expletive-laden rant against state and government handling of the coronavirus pandemic.

In December, Rapaport targeted Los Angeles Democratic Mayor Eric Garcetti and California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom for their handling of the COVID-19 pandemic in Los Angeles County and across the state of California. In November, Garcetti canceled both indoor and outdoor dining as COVID-19 cases climbed across the city. Newsom’s regional stay-at-home order, which demanded area residents remain sheltered in place unless leaving the home for essential travel, was also in place at the time.

In videotaped remarks, Rapaport — who lives in Los Angeles — blasted state and local COVID-19 restrictions after he discovered an operational flea market near an area high school.

Filming the flea market, a furious Rapaport said, “Yo, look at this s**t! The f***in’ Melrose-Fairfax farmer’s market is poppin’! And I have no problem with all of these people making their money and making a living, but how the f*** is this OK, but right across the street, all the cafes, all of the restaurants are shut down?”

“Look at this s**t!” he demanded. “Get your money, but who’s making the decisions here? Garcetti, you f***! Gavin Newsom with the f***in’ good hair! You f***! Look, they got the music playing and all of this s**t! This s**t doesn’t make any f***in’ sense. This don’t make any f***in’ sense. This is why motherf***ers are pissed off and protesting!”

Posted on

Kamala Harris unveils 5-pillar strategy to combat the border crisis. It says virtually nothing about the border.

Vice President Kamala Harris on Thursday released her long-anticipated plan to combat the ongoing immigration crisis at the U.S. southern border. Unsurprisingly, the plan has scarcely anything to offer as far as the actual border goes.

In fact, the plan, released without a news conference, “does not include a detailed timeline or specific policy actions to be taken” at all, The Hill reported Thursday. Instead, the administration argued the problem could be resolved with greater “engagement” with Central American countries and more “humane” immigration practices, generally.

In a statement introducing the “Root Causes Strategy,” the White House touted Harris’s five-pillar plan as a core component of the administration’s efforts to “establish a fair, orderly, and humane immigration system” through “various U.S. government tools, including diplomacy, foreign assistance, public diplomacy, and sanctions.”

But instead of offering concrete solutions to secure the country’s southern border amid an unprecedented surge of migrants, the administration deferred to using feel-good language and offering abstract aspirations about addressing the “humanitarian” crisis in Central America.

The lofty, feel-good language can be felt in the plan’s stated five pillars, which go as follows, according to a White House fact sheet:

  • Pillar I: Addressing economic insecurity and inequality;
  • Pillar II: Combating corruption, strengthening democratic governance, and advancing the rule of law;
  • Pillar III: Promoting respect for human rights, labor rights, and free press;
  • Pillar IV: Countering and preventing violence, extortion, and other crimes perpetrated by criminal gangs, trafficking networks, and other organized criminal organizations; and
  • Pillar V: Combating sexual, gender-based, and domestic violence.

Nowhere in the five-pillar plan does Harris — who was tasked with managing the border crisis in March — mention anything about border enforcement. One would think that U.S. border enforcement ought to be of utmost importance for the U.S. vice president. But judging by the details of the plan, it seems as if Harris is more concerned with crafting government policy for Central American countries.

Don’t worry, Harris indicates to the American people as scores of migrants continue to surge the border — 50,000 of them released into the country without court dates — she and President Biden “have restarted our nation’s engagement in Central America and diplomatic efforts with Central American governments.”

That promise will likely not come as a relief to border-town Americans and others whose lives are being upended by the border crisis.

Besides, political “engagement” usually means more than talks and vague cooperation. It means dollars, and Harris admits as much in her plan when she says, “We have already received commitments from the governments of Mexico, Japan, and Korea, and the United Nations, to join the United States in providing relief to the region” (emphases added).

In her coverage of the news, HotAir’s Karen Townsend noted that all the “fuzzy feel-good language” just means that “the Biden administration is offering up pallets of cash for corrupt Central American leaders [who] will line their pockets and those within their inner circles.” Instead, she argued:

Here’s what should be happening, if this administration can, in fact, walk and chew gum at the same time. There should be attention paid to the southern border before we worry about long-term solutions to anything. The Biden border crisis is an immediate humanitarian and public health crisis. All the other stuff is unicorns and rainbows and hopes for later in a better world. Who is in charge of the present real-life crisis? It’s not DHS and Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, obviously. He’s still denying the crisis and at the same time claiming everything is under control.

The crux of the matter may be that the administration simply doesn’t see the immigration problem as just that — a problem.

One senior administration official acknowledged, “We’re not seeking to end migration as part of the fabric of this region … what we’re seeking to change is the ways in which people migrate, to provide an alternative to the criminal smuggling and trafficking rings and to give people access to opportunity and protection through safe legal channels, safe legal pathways.”

Posted on

House Democrats repeal amendment banning taxpayer funding for abortions overseas

House Democrats on Wednesday voted to repeal a ban on U.S. taxpayer funding for elective abortions in foreign countries.

The House voted 217-212 on a State Department and foreign assistance spending bill that, for the first time in more than half a century, did not include a provision know as the Helms Amendment, which blocks fundings for abortions. The bill, which no Republican supported, also repealed the Mexico City policy, a provision that blocks U.S. federal funding for non-governmental organizations that provide abortions overseas.

All but three Democrats voted in favor of repealing the Helms Amendment and the Mexico City policy, which critics call the “Global Gag Rule.” Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Cori Bush (D-Mo.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), voted against the bill for reasons unrelated to abortion funding.

“We are proud to be permanently repealing the Global Gag Rule: a dangerous rule that deprives the poorest families in the world a basic health care and family planning services,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a statement after the bill passed.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, celebrated the repeal of the Helms Amendment as her first major legislative initiative as chairwoman on the subcommittee.

“I am especially proud to have fought for the elimination of Helms Amendment restrictions that have prohibited safe abortion and health care services for people in low-income countries for decades,” Lee said in a statement.

Republicans and pro-life groups lambasted Democrats for attempting to force taxpayers to pay for abortions in foreign countries.

In a speech decrying the $62.24 billion spending bill, Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) said the worst thing Democrats did was repeal the Helms Amendment. “The removal of that language is unprecedented,” he said, according to The Hill.

The Susan B. Anthony List, a pro-life activist organization, decried the Democrats “extreme, pro-abortion spending bills” in a news release.

“For decades, the Hyde family of policies has protected unborn children and their mothers and kept taxpayers out of the abortion business, with the original Hyde Amendment saving nearly 2.5 million lives,” SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser said. “Joe Biden himself once supported common ground pro-life protections, as the strong majority of Americans do – yet Biden-Pelosi Democrats are scrapping this longstanding bipartisan consensus to pander to the global abortion lobby. Abortion is violence against the most vulnerable, not ‘family planning.’ Americans should never be forced to subsidize abortion on demand through birth at home, to be complicit in human rights abuses overseas, or to export abortion extremism around the globe.

“We thank our pro-life allies in Congress, whose unity stands in contrast to Biden’s empty promises, as they fight to save innocent lives. These bills are far too extreme to pass the Senate and are a political liability for pro-abortion Democrats.”

Appropriations bills in the Senate must meet a 60-vote threshold to overcome a filibuster and advance to a final vote. Senate Republicans will assuredly attempt to block any pro-abortion provisions of Democrat spending bills, including repeal of the Helms Amendment or the Hyde Amendment, language that prevents Medicaid dollars from being spent on elective abortions.

If Democrats choose to circumvent a filibuster attempt by attaching these spending bills to a budget reconciliation package, it will be up to moderate Democrats like Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) to preserve these pro-life amendments.

Earlier this month, Manchin and Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) sent a joint letter to the Senate Appropriations Committee urging congressional leaders to preserve the Hyde Amendment.

Posted on

Journalist savaged for pushing ‘porn for children’ in now-deleted tweet, saying ‘young teens’ need ‘soft core site where everyone asks for consent’

Journalist Flora Gill is taking a beating on Twitter for her now-deleted Thursday tweet that pushed the idea of “porn for children.”

What are the details?

Gill — a London-based writer for the likes of GQ, the Sunday Times, and the Evening Standard and the daughter of U.K. politician Amber Rudd — wrote that “someone needs to create porn for children. Hear me out.”

Her post also noted: “Young teens are already watching porn but they’re finding hard core aggressive videos that give a terrible view of sex. They need entry level porn! A soft core site where everyone asks for consent and no one gets choked, etc.”

Soon after, however, Gill said she deleted the tweet “before it picks up steam” so as to avoid “getting swept up into another Twitter cesspool.”

“Obviously not an actual solution, but it is a real problem,” she added. “Everyone take a deep breath.”

In another tweet Gill acknowledged that her “wording” in her initial post was “abysmal” — and in yet another tweet chastised those who ripped her original post after she deleted it:

“Apropos of nothing I really think if someone quickly deletes a tweet, it shouldn’t be screenshotted and shared like… just let it die, you know?” she asked. “No? No one else agree?”

Here’s another tweet on the subject that many said Gill also deleted:

What did her critics have to say?

While some Twitter users actually sided with and supported Gill’s idea, it appeared that most others told her she was in the wrong — and in no uncertain terms:

  • “Flora Gill actually thought that, typed that, and press[ed] send,” one commenter wrote. “Huh.”
  • “Flora Gill is an idiot lol,” another user said. “All porn does is encourage harmful attitudes towards sex, but now she wants to damage children in the same way that porn has damaged so many adults…?”
  • “Flora Gill out here proving once again that media nepotism is embarazzing [sic] for all concerned,” another commenter quipped, presumably in reference to her mother’s notoriety.
  • “I’m struggling to imagine what actually happened on a cognitive level when Flora Gill wrote that tweet, read it back, and thought, ‘Yes, this will do nicely,'” another user said.

(H/T: Mediaite)

Posted on

Off-duty Border Patrol agent intervenes, helps foil attempted carjacking of a pastor’s vehicle

An off-duty Border Patrol agent and a private citizen recently stopped the attempted carjacking of a pastor’s vehicle, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

CBP reported that while heading to work about 12:45 p.m. Sunday, Border Patrol agent Roy Rosas of the El Centro Sector in Southern California witnessed the attempted carjacking occurring.

“The victim of the crime, a local church pastor, was assaulted by a 24-year-old Westmorland man who attempted to take the victim’s car. A scuffle ensued between agent Rosas, the private citizen, and the assailant. The aggressor was subdued and successfully removed from the pastor’s vehicle,” CBP noted.

The agency’s news release said that the man was detained pending the arrival of the police. The man suffered minor injuries and was transported to a hospital, treated and released prior to being booked into county jail.

“As sworn officers, Border Patrol agents risk their lives every day both on- and off-duty,” Chief Patrol Agent Gregory K. Bovino said. “Agent Rosas’ actions demonstrated just that and brought great credit upon himself and the U.S. Border Patrol.”

Authorities continue to capture previously removed convicted criminals.

On Wednesday, Border Patrol agents assigned to the El Centro Sector arrested a 64-year-old Mexican man who unlawfully entered the country. That man “is a member of the Paisas prison gang with an extensive criminal history and has been previously removed by an Immigration Judge,” according to CBP.

Agents also continue to encounter large groups along the border

McAllen Border Patrol Station agents recently encountered a group of 509 people, which included 331 family members, 115 unaccompanied kids, and 63 single adults, according to a news release. The group included migrants from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Ecuador, and Venezuela.

Posted on

AG Merrick Garland threatens legal action if Texas Gov. Abbott does not rescind executive order on migrant transportation

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday threatened legal action if Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) does not rescind an executive order that Garland characterized as “both dangerous and unlawful.”

Abbott issued an executive order Wednesday that declared in part: “No person, other than a federal, state, or local law-enforcement official, shall provide ground transportation to a group of migrants who have been detained by [U.S. Customs and Border Protection] for crossing the border illegally or who would have been subject to expulsion under the Title 42 order.”

The GOP governor explained that the move is meant to decrease the risk of coronavirus exposure in the state.

“The dramatic rise in unlawful border crossings has also led to a dramatic rise in COVID-19 cases among unlawful migrants who have made their way into our state, and we must do more to protect Texans from this virus and reduce the burden on our communities,” Abbott said, according to a news release about the order. “This Executive Order will reduce the risk of COVID-19 exposure in our communities.”

But in a letter to Abbott on Thursday, Garland asserted that there were various issues with the governor’s order, including that it would place people’s health and safety at risk. ” The Order is both dangerous and unlawful,” he wrote.

“The Order would jeopardize the health and safety of noncitizens in federal govern­ment custody, federal law enforcement personnel and their families, and our communities,” Garland wrote. “Among other harms, the Order would exacerbate and prolong overcrowding in facilities and shelters and obstruct the federal government’s arrangements with state, local, and non­ governmental partners to ensure that released individuals are transported for appropriate COVID-19 testing to address public health concerns.

“Additionally, because federal law requires individuals processed for release to appear before immigration courts or report to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement offices throughout the country, the Order directly interferes with the implementation of federal immigration law,” Garland said.

Garland said that if Abbott does not rescind the order, the government plans to employ every appropriate legal remedy to make certain that the Lone Star State “does not interfere with the functions of the federal govern­ment.”

In a statement responding to Garland’s letter, Abbott blamed the Biden administration for the crisis along the nation’s southern border and said that he will take all actions in line with the law to carry out his duty to defend the the health and safety of Texans.

“The current crisis at our southern border, including the overcrowding of immigration facilities and the devastating spread of COVID-19 that the influx of non-citizens is causing, is entirely the creation of the Biden Administration and its failed immigration policies,” Abbott said. “By choosing not to enforce immigration laws, removing sound policies like the Remain in Mexico program, and failing to make the most robust use of Title 42 authorities, this Administration has directly caused the unprecedented crisis Texas is facing. And it is increasingly a matter of grave public-health concern as unlawful migrants enter from countries with lower vaccination rates than the United States.”