International

The United States Supreme Court gives Texas free rein to arrest and expel migrants

The Supreme Court of Justice ruled on Tuesday in favor of the state of Texas allowing it to enter into force of a law that allows the Police to arrest and expel migrants suspected of irregularly entering the United States.

The legislation, known as SB4, may enter into force while the arguments of a lawsuit filed by the Government of President Joe Biden and organizations defending migrants are heard.

The case reached the highest court after a legal battle undertaken by the Biden Administration and advocates of immigrants led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), who allege that the initiative is unconstitutional.

The plaintiffs had asked the Supreme Court to stop the implementation of the measure while the case was being settled in the Fifth Circuit of Appeals. On Monday, Judge Samuel Alito had blocked the law indefinitely, waiting for the plenary to vote on this request.

On Tuesday, the six conservative judges voted in favor of Texas, allowing the law to take effect while a final ruling is given in the case.

20260330_renta_mh_728x90

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton applauded the high court’s decision in a message in X. “Texas has defeated the emergency motions of the Biden Administration and the ACLU,” and stressed that the law is already in force.

The law, one of the most drastic anti-immigrant measures in the history of the United States, makes it a misdemeanor that a foreigner “enters or attempts to enter the state from a foreign nation” irregularly. The offense becomes a serious crime, punishable by up to 20 years in prison, if the offender is a repeat offender.

The initiative also allows the state Justice to order the expulsion of people without legal process. Likewise, police officers will be able to arrest any individual they suspect that he entered the country illegally, and will have the discretionary power to expel him to Mexico instead of arresting him.

Initially, the measure promoted by the governor of Texas, Republican Greg Abbott, was supposed to enter into force on March 5, but a federal judge sided with the plaintiffs and banned it.

The Texas prosecutor, Ken Paxton, took the fight to the Fifth Circuit of Appeals where he obtained support, so the plaintiffs went to the Supreme Court to prevent the law from entering into force asking for an emergency motion, which was finally denied.

20260330_renta_mh_728x90

Anand Balakrishnan, lead lawyer of the ACLU Immigrant Rights Project, described Tuesday’s decision as “disappointing.”

The lawyer added in a statement that the law “threatens the integrity of our nation’s immigration laws and the fundamental principles of due process” so they will continue to fight until they defeat it.

Related Topics:Supreme Court United States

Up Next

Milei celebrates 100 days as president, between the controversy and his obstinacy about the course

Don't Miss

Biden and Trump win the primaries of their parties in Ohio, Illinois and Kansas

20260330_renta_mh_300x250

International

Former Trump allies call for removal, cite 25th Amendment amid Iran threats

Former allies of U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday called for his removal from office, arguing he is unfit to continue in the role following recent threats to “wipe out an entire civilization,” made just hours before the deadline of his ultimatum to Iran.

One of the most prominent voices was former Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who invoked the 25th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as a mechanism to remove the president from power.

“25th Amendment! Not a single bomb has fallen on the U.S. We cannot annihilate an entire civilization. This is evil and insanity,” Greene wrote on social media platform X.

Greene, once a leading figure within Trump’s political movement during his first term, broke with the president last November over disagreements on foreign policy and his handling of controversial cases.

Another former supporter, controversial commentator Alex Jones, also raised the possibility of applying the constitutional provision during his show, in a conversation with attorney Robert Barnes.

Barnes explained that invoking the 25th Amendment requires the support of two-thirds of Congress, making it a more complex process than impeachment.

20260330_renta_mh_728x90

Section 4 of the amendment, ratified in 1967, establishes that the vice president, together with a majority of the cabinet, can declare the president unable to perform the duties of the office, a decision that must then be confirmed by both chambers of Congress.

The statements come amid rising international tensions and increasing domestic political pressure on the president.

International

Trump pauses strikes on Iran, extends ultimatum by two weeks

The president of the United States, Donald Trump, announced a temporary suspension of attacks against Iran for a period of two weeks, extending the ultimatum he had imposed on Tehran just hours before its deadline.

According to the president, the measure is conditional on Iran allowing the “full, immediate, and secure” reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Trump stated that the decision would involve a reciprocal ceasefire between both parties.

The announcement was made through a message on his social media platform, where he emphasized that the pause in military actions is intended to create space for de-escalation in the region.

He also noted that the decision followed a conversation with the prime minister of Pakistan, Shehbaz Sharif, who requested a two-week extension of the ultimatum.

The move comes amid heightened global tensions, marked by escalating threats and concerns over the potential impact of the conflict on key international energy trade routes.

20260330_renta_mh_728x90

International

WHO worker killed as Israeli forces fire on Gaza medical convoy

An employee of the World Health Organization (WHO) was killed on Monday in Gaza Strip after Israeli forces opened fire on a medical convoy transporting patients for evacuation, according to witnesses and official accounts.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said the vehicle approached troops in a “threatening manner,” alleging that the driver accelerated toward soldiers despite warning shots. “The troops fired warning shots. The vehicle continued advancing, and additional fire was directed at it,” the military said in a statement.

The army also claimed the vehicle lacked clear markings and was therefore treated as a potential threat.

However, survivors disputed that account. Raed Aslan, a passenger in the convoy, told reporters in Khan Younis that the vehicles were clearly marked with WHO insignia. “The vehicle was clearly identified as belonging to the WHO,” he said, adding that an Israeli tank blocked the road and fired at the driver despite the route being empty.

The convoy was transporting patients to the Rafah crossing, the only exit point available for medical evacuations abroad, as Israel does not permit transfers to Jerusalem or the West Bank.

20260330_renta_mh_728x90

The incident adds to a series of controversial cases involving Israeli military actions against humanitarian convoys. In April 2024, seven workers from World Central Kitchen were killed in an Israeli strike in Deir al-Balah. The military initially cited a “misidentification,” despite the vehicles being clearly marked.

Similarly, in March 2025, 15 paramedics, rescuers, and a UN worker were killed near Rafah. Israeli authorities first claimed emergency lights were off, but video evidence later contradicted that assertion.

A subsequent investigation by organizations including Forensic Architecture found that Israeli forces fired hundreds of rounds at the convoy, and that the vehicles were later destroyed and buried along with the bodies before being recovered days later.

The latest incident is likely to intensify scrutiny over the conduct of military operations in Gaza, particularly regarding the safety of humanitarian personnel and medical evacuations.