1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AMARILLO DIVISION

) 

STATE OF TEXAS, ) 

 ) 

Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

v. ) Civil Action No. 2:22-cv-00094-Z

) 

ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, ) 

in his official capacity as ) 

Secretary of Homeland Security, et al., ) 

 ) 

Defendants. ) 

 ) 

DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY 

Defendants write to advise the Court of a new Supreme Court decision that bears on this 

case and on the supplemental briefing that this Court ordered on May 3, 2022. ECF No. 11. On 

June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court decided Texas v. Biden, and reversed a Fifth Circuit decision 

that had required the government to implement the Migrant Protection Protocols. Biden v. Texas, 

No. 21-954, 2022 WL 2347211 (U.S. June 30, 2022). In doing so, the Supreme Court reiterated its 

recent holding in Garland v. Aleman Gonzalez, 596 U. S. ––––, 2022 WL 2111346 (U.S. June 13, 

2022), that 8 U.S.C. § 1252(f)(1) “no doubt deprives the lower courts of ‘jurisdiction’” to grant 

injunctive relief related to covered provisions. Biden v. Texas, 2022 WL 2347211, at *9; see also 

ECF No. 64, Notice of Supplemental Authority (addressing Aleman Gonzalez). In Texas v. Biden, 

the Supreme Court applied Section 1252(f) in a case brought by the State of Texas, clarifying that 

this provision applies to State plaintiffs, and held that “[t]he District Court’s injunction ... violated 

that provision.” Biden v. Texas, 2022 WL 2347211, at *7. 

Case 2:22-cv-00094-Z Document 67 Filed 07/07/22 Page 1 of 4 PageID 718
2 

Plaintiff in this case is also the State of Texas. Here, just as in Biden v. Texas, Texas seeks 

an injunction that would require the federal government to adopt its view of 8 U.S.C. § 1225. 

Compare Biden v. Texas, 2022 WL 2347211, at *7 (describing injunction entered by the district 

court at Texas’s request to enforce Texas’s interpretation of “the contiguous-territory return” 

provision in “section 1225(b)(2)(C)”), with ECF No. 21, Motion for Preliminary Injunction 

(seeking an injunction to enforce Plaintiff’s reading of section 1225(b)). Biden v. Texas together 

with Aleman unambiguously establishes that Section 1225(f)(1) deprives this Court of jurisdiction 

to enter the injunction that Texas seeks. See Aleman Gonzalez, 596 U.S. at ___ (slip op. at 7) 

(holding that Section 1252(f) bars injunctions “requir[ing] officials to take actions that (in the 

Government’s view) are not required by [the covered provisions] and to refrain from actions that 

(again in the Government’s view) are allowed by [the covered provisions]”). 

The Supreme Court in Biden v. Texas reserved decision on whether Section 1252(f)(1) bars 

district courts from “vacating” agency actions under the Administrative Procedure Act. See 597 

U.S. at ___ (slip op. at 12 n.4). But for the reasons the Government previously explained in its 

supplemental brief, Section 1252(f)(1) bars such relief in this case as well. ECF No. 17 at 14-18. 

 

Case 2:22-cv-00094-Z Document 67 Filed 07/07/22 Page 2 of 4 PageID 719
3 

Date: July 7, 2022 Respectfully submitted, 

 BRIAN M. BOYNTON 

 Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General 

 WILLIAM C. PEACHEY 

 Director

Office of Immigration Litigation 

District Court Section 

EREZ REUVENI 

Assistant Director 

/s/ Brian C. Ward 

 BRIAN C. WARD 

Senior Litigation Counsel 

U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division 

Office of Immigration Litigation 

District Court Section 

P.O. Box 868, Ben Franklin Station 

Washington, DC 20044 

Tel.: (202) 616-9121 

Email: brian.c.ward@usdoj.gov 

JOSEPH DARROW 

ELISSA FUDIM 

ERIN RYAN 

Trial Attorneys 

SARAH STEVENS WILSON 

Assistant Director

Office of Immigration Litigation 

Appellate Section

 

Case 2:22-cv-00094-Z Document 67 Filed 07/07/22 Page 3 of 4 PageID 720
4 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on July 7, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the 

Clerk of the Court for the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas by using 

the CM/ECF system. Counsel in the case are registered CM/ECF users and service will be 

accomplished by the CM/ECF system. 

/s/ Brian C. Ward 

 BRIAN C. WARD 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Case 2:22-cv-00094-Z Document 67 Filed 07/07/22 Page 4 of 4 PageID 721