The legal battle over Texas' immigration law Senate Bill 4, passed back in 2023, took a new turn as the U.S. Justice Department stepped back from its challenge against the legislation. Despite the federal government's withdrawal, the legal dispute over the state's immigration enforcement powers continues. According to FOX 7 Austin, private parties including El Paso County and the Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, represented by U.S. District Judge David Ezra, are determined to push forward with the case, with a trial date set for July 8. "However, regardless of the position taken by the United States, there are private parties in this case who intend to prosecute the case regardless of whether the United States intends to proceed," Ezra stated in his order.

Originally, the government sued Texas on the grounds that the Constitution establishes the federal government as the ultimate authority in matters of immigration. SB 4 allows Texas to enforce its own immigration laws—a move that has been controversial. Under the law, local law enforcement officers can arrest migrants caught crossing the border illegally, and those admitting to illegal crossing within Texas are also at risk of being charged. In certain scenarios, charges can be dropped if migrants agree to return to Mexico, as per The Dallas Morning News. Despite the DOJ's departure from the case, SB 4 remains blocked from being enforced following rulings in district and appeals courts.

Political responses to the DOJ's withdrawal have been mixed. Governor Greg Abbott's spokesperson, Andrew Mahaleris, told The Dallas Morning News, "Governor Abbott appreciates the federal government removing itself from litigation that President Biden foolishly entered, but the fight is not yet over. Texas will not back down from upholding its constitutional right to defend itself." Meanwhile, Rep. David Spiller, the House sponsor of SB 4, tweeted his optimism regarding the case's future: "Bring it."

While the official stance of the Justice Department was not immediately provided regarding their decision to drop the lawsuit, the state-initiated law has sparked considerable debate over the balance of immigration enforcement between state and federal powers. Advocacy groups and some public officials continue to argue that SB 4 undermines the established federal authority and threatens the civil rights of immigrants. SB 4 established state crimes for illegal border crossing and enabled a state-directed removal process for migrants convicted of such crimes, which has been a point of contention for its critics. As the trial proceeds, many eyes remain firmly fixed on this high-stakes legal contest and its implications for immigration policy and the principle of federalism.