Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Friday rejected the Biden administration's demands for access to Shelby Park in Eagle Pass where the Border Patrol previously processed large numbers of illegal aliens who crossed the Rio Grande from Mexico. Texas took control of the 47-acre city park on January 10 by order of Gov. Greg Abbott (R) and has blocked the federal government from accessing the property ever since — even after the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could cut or remove razor wire and other barriers it had erected Texas to protect the state from mass illegal immigration enabled by the Biden administration.
Texas' move to bar the federal government from Shelby Park sparked additional controversy when Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas) falsely accused Governor Abbott of allowing three illegal aliens to drown in the Rio Grande by denying Border Patrol agents access to the park.
The Biden administration has not yet tried to use force to reach the park. The Department of Homeland Security sent a letter Tuesday citing the Supreme Court's decision to require access to the park. Texas denied the DHS request. (Excerpt, CNN timeline of events at Shelby Park):
The US Department of Homeland Security sent a letter to the Texas Attorney General reiterating the federal government's request that state authorities fully reopen the Shelby Park area to Border Patrol agents.
This time, DHS's general counsel cited a Supreme Court ruling that allows federal authorities to cut or remove razor wire, and said they have the legal right to access disputed areas of Eagle Pass.
“Pursuant to the federal law that enables the United States government to condemn property rights necessary to control and guard the borders of the United States, 8 USC § 1103(b), the Department acquired permanent real estate interests in and around Eagle Pass in 2008 to support : “Construction and maintenance of border barriers in and around Shelby Park.”
“For much of the property…the department has obtained minor interest from the City of Eagle Pass by condemnation as well as from private landowners.”
Paxton sent a response letter to the Department of Homeland Security's general counsel on Friday rejecting demands for access to Shelby Park and instead making demands for the federal government to prove ownership or provide access agreements for parcels of land in or near the park. Department claims to be. Paxton gave DHS a February 15 deadline.
Paxton posted about his letter on X Twitter:
Today, it rejected the Biden administration's baseless demands and issued counter-demands. By February 15, DHS must submit official maps and deeds showing the exact parcels they claim, an explanation of how the state of Texas is blocking access to those specific parcels, and documentation showing that Eagle Pass or Texas gave DHS permission to build infrastructure that conflicts with With border security, and evidence of Congress empowering the Department of Homeland Security to turn the Texas park into an unofficial and illegal port of entry. If the federal government. If you make such claims, you must provide proof.
Presumably because there has been no meaningful response to our letter, your latest letter disavows previous factual assertions, asserts new ones, and provides less legal basis for your request. Again, I respectfully suggest that any time you might spend suing Texas should be redirected toward enforcing the immigration laws Congress has already passed. As I've said before, this office will continue to defend Texas' efforts to protect its southern border against every effort by the Biden administration to undermine the state's constitutional right to self-defense.
🚨 Today, it rejected the Biden administration's baseless demands and issued counter-demands. By February 15, DHS must provide maps and official titles showing the exact packages they claim, and an explanation of how Texas is blocking access to those… https://t.co/cXwBfGtiG3
– Attorney General Ken Paxton (@KenPaxtonTX) January 27, 2024
Text of Paxton's letter:
January 26, 2024
Jonathan E. Mayer
General Counsel
US Department of Homeland Security
2707 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave SE
Washington, DC 20528-0525
Dear Mr. Mayer:Dear Mr. Mayer:
I received a second demand letter dated January 23, 2024, in which DHS continues to complain about how TMD has secured Shelby Park in Eagle Pass, Texas. In a previous response, you explained that your original post “misrepresents the facts and the law in demanding that Texas surrender to President Biden’s open border policies.” Presumably because there has been no meaningful response to our letter, your latest letter disavows previous factual assertions, asserts new ones, and provides less legal basis for your request. Again, I respectfully suggest that any time you might spend suing Texas should be redirected toward enforcing the immigration laws Congress has already passed.Again, let's start with the facts. As I have previously explained, the US Border Patrol withdrew from Shelby Park last year and deliberately reduced its ability to respond to medical emergencies in the immediate area. The tragic January 12, 2024 accident that you once tried to pin on Texas actually occurred long before your agency's officers arrived at the Shelby Park gate – clearly lacking any equipment to conduct an emergency rescue. The supposed “Memorandum of Agreement” between US Customs and Border Protection and the City of Eagle Pass as of 2015 (2015 MOA) has not been approved by the State of Texas as required by the State Constitution. Your last post doesn't dispute any of this. Instead, it now claims that Texas has somehow restricted access to federally owned lands. However, your first application letter acknowledged that Shelby Park “is municipal land owned by the City of Eagle Pass,” not the United States. which is?
If this newfound claim of federal “property rights” is true, Texas will of course remove any encumbrances to federal lands by legal court order. This state will continue to respect the property rights of another sovereign, even if the federal government refuses to do so. See, for example, Texas v. DHS, 2023 WL 7135677, at *3 (W.D. Tex. Oct. 30, 2023) (Moses, CJ) (finding federal agents repeatedly trespassed on state property, and even “damaged more property in just one day” after the state requested a warrant Temporarily restrictive); Texas v. DHS, 88 F.4th 1127, 1136 (5th Cir. 2023) (noting that federal agents “repeatedly suffered damages”[d]Demolition[ed]And exercise[ed]
Control of State Property'”), vacated, 2024 WL 222180 (U.S. Jan. 22, 2024) (Memorandum).After diligent research in the arbitrarily short period of time you have allocated to this appeal, it appears that there are serious reasons to question each of your new claims to federal property rights. First, it says the United States obtained a simple title to certain parcels of land in the Shelby Park area. But your map shows that most of the acreage you refer to is outside the perimeter area secured by Texas at Shelby Park. Regarding the parcels of land identified on your maps that are actually located near the park, publicly available records indicate that the United States does not even claim to own what your last letter claims. For example, the home-cooked map attached to your file
The letter implied that the United States had title to every parcel of land on the west side of Ryan Street adjacent to Shelby Park. Based on our necessarily cursory review, current records from Maverick County do not support this claim. By February 15, 2024, the State of Texas hereby requires your agency to submit the following documents and information to this office:Maps and official deeds showing the exact parcels of land they believed the United States owned; And your explanation of how Texas officials prevented federal agents from accessing those packages.
Second, you say the United States obtained a permanent easement from the City of Eagle Pass in 2018. And what I said last week about the 2015 MOU, I'll say again about your last claim: “Texas never agreed to that deal as required by Article IV “. § 10 of the Texas Constitution. Your federal agency cannot take something the city was not entitled to provide. You are invited to read this document at https://tlc.texas.gov/docs/legref/TxConst.pdf. But even if the 2015 MOU is more or less valid, you are not seeking to “reach in accordance with” its terms. This 2018 “non-exclusive” easement is attached for your convenience. Its express “purpose” was to allow “maintenance”. . . “road” along the river, including the “right of cut”. . . trees” or other obstructions within the roadway. Elsewhere, the 2018 Easement Act prohibits the United States from making any permanent improvements “other than a roadway” without written approval from the city. If your federal agency would like to assist municipal officials with tree trimming and roadway maintenance , I think they would appreciate the help. However, the 2018 facilities do not include any consideration of allowing the federal government to deploy the infrastructure that President Biden will use to funnel thousands of illegal aliens into a park that “will continue to [be] Uses[d] And enjoy[ed]For “entertainment events.” By February 15, 2024, the State of Texas hereby requires your agency to submit the following documents and information to this office:
Any written approval from the City of Eagle Pass or the State of Texas to allow your federal agents to set up the open border infrastructure alluded to in your letter; And your explanation of where Congress empowered your federal agency to pursue this scheme, regardless of statutory provisions to the contrary.
Without explaining the limits and limitations of the federal government's alleged “property rights,” and how its legal access to that property has been hindered in any way, the state cannot meaningfully evaluate your claim. But to the extent your agency requires access in order to once again turn Shelby Park into an “unofficial and illegal port of entry,” Texas v. Department of Homeland Security, 2023 WL 8285223, at *14 (W.D. Tex. Nov. 29, 2023) ( Moses, CJ), Your request is hereby denied.
To be clear, your last letter indicates that there is no law supporting the agency's right to do this. In an unexplained reference to “the responsibility of border guards and legal authorities,” you parrot legal language about the need for “border control.” But you (not surprisingly) omitted legal language that your agency continues to publicly ignore: the Border Patrol is charged with “policing the border to prevent the illegal entry of aliens.” 8 USC § 1357(a)(3) (emphasis added). Instead, you focus your attention on a recent order from the United States Supreme Court. As you know, this unsigned order provides no rationale for vacating the Fifth Circuit's order. It could be
The Supreme Court was misled by the allegations made by your federal agency, which you reiterated in your January 14 letter to our office. In any case, the court order certainly said nothing about access to Shelby Park, which even the federal government's lawyers admitted “was not presented” in that ongoing lawsuit. See Supplementary Note II at 5, DHS v. Texas, No. 23A607 (January 15, 2024).As I've said before, this office will continue to defend Texas' efforts to protect its southern border against every effort by the Biden administration to undermine the state's constitutional right to self-defense. You should advise your clients to join us in these efforts by doing their jobs and following the law.
sincerely,
Ken Paxton
Attorney General of Texas
Cc: The Honorable Greg Abbott, Governor of the State of Texas
Major General Thomas M. Sulzer, Commanding General of the Texas Military Department
His Excellency Mr. Merrick B. Garland, US Attorney General
Paxton appeared on Fox News Thursday night to discuss the crisis at the border:
