Posted: May 15, 2026
On May 14, a U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, in a 78-page opinion in L.M.L. & K.G.S. v. Martin, No. 1:26-CV-01170-DAE, issued a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement of most of SB 4 (specifically, enforcing Penal Code §§51.03 and 51.04 and Code of Criminal Procedure Arts. 5B.002 and 5B.003). The plaintiffs, who are noncitizens residing in Austin, filed suit on pre-emption grounds against SB 4’s re-entry and removal provisions, which makes it a crime for noncitizens to enter, attempt to enter, or be found in Texas after they have “been denied admission to” or removed from the United States while an order of removal is outstanding.
The federal district court concluded that the plaintiffs demonstrated a substantial threat of enforcement, which was enough to meet the standing requirement. The district court summarized “the properly framed inquiry here: whether the provisions of SB 4 that Plaintiffs challenge may be constitutionally enforced against them pursuant to the State War Clause, as Defendant contends, or whether they are preempted by federal law, as Plaintiffs argue.” The district court concluded that by “regulating a sphere dominated by federal interests, SB 4 violates the Supremacy Clause. Indeed, it is implausible to imagine each of the fifty United States having their own state immigration policy superseding the powers inherent in the United States as a Nation.”
Note that the district court did not enjoin enforcement of the entry provisions found in Penal Code §51.02 (illegal entry other than at a port of entry), a Class B misdemeanor, nor did it enjoin Code of Criminal Procedure Art. 42A.059 (no probation or deferred adjudication for a Chapter 51 offense), so persons caught in the act of crossing the border in violation of §51.02 may now be subject to those provisions.