Biden vs Lone Star
5.55pm San Antonio / 6.55pm DC
The Justice Department filed suit on Monday against the State of Texas over its installation of a floating barrier meant to stop people from swimming across the Rio Grande, arguing that the interlocking buoys placed in the river by the state violated federal law. The Department of Justice has sued Gov. Abbott and Texas over their inhumane and unlawful border buoy and razor wire stunt at the southern border.
The suit comes after Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, who heralded the installation of the 1,000-foot barrier this month, refused a request from the Justice Department to remove the buoys voluntarily, vowing instead to fight in court to keep them in place. Mr. Abbott has blamed President Biden for the large numbers of migrants crossing the border illegally.
“If you truly care about human life, you must begin enforcing federal immigration laws,” Mr. Abbott wrote in a letter to President Biden on Monday. “In the meantime, Texas will fully utilize its constitutional authority to deal with the crisis you have caused.”
The federal government argues that Texas is in violation of a section of the federal Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act that prohibits the placement of structures in waterways without federal approval.
“This floating barrier poses threats to navigation and public safety and presents humanitarian concerns,” Vanita Gupta, an associate attorney general, said in a statement announcing the suit. “Additionally, the presence of the floating barrier has prompted diplomatic protests by Mexico and risks damaging U.S. foreign policy.”
New Border Tactics: Texas law enforcement officials are relying on an increasingly brutal approach to the border that is creating tensions with federal agents who warn it could lead to more drownings.
Customs and Border Protection: The agency was set up after 9/11 amid the fight against terrorism. Its responsibilities have ballooned with the influx of asylum-seeking migrants crossing the southern border.
A Decline in Crossings: Nearly two months since the lifting of a public health order that allowed the United States to swiftly expel migrants at the southern border, the number of migrants crossing into the country has sharply declined. Will the lull last?
A Ticking Clock: Tens of thousands of people who crossed the border in the last year planned to apply for asylum. But the complexities of the process mean many will miss the deadline to do so.
The federal government is asking the court to compel Texas to remove the barriers already installed and forbid the installation of any new barriers elsewhere in the river.
The emerging legal fight represents the first time that the Justice Department has directly challenged Mr. Abbott over his effort to enforce immigration laws, sending thousands of National Guard troops and state police officers to block migrants from crossing into Texas. The multibillion-dollar program, begun more than two years ago, is known as Operation Lone Star.
The suit follows growing outcry among Democrats and even some in Texas law enforcement over the increasingly aggressive tactics the state is using to block immigrants, including installing additional layers of concertina wire along the banks of the Rio Grande. State police officers have been shouting at migrants to turn back and, in some cases, refusing to provide water to people who request it.
The tactics have been deployed at points along the border where illegal crossings are common, particularly in the small border town of Eagle Pass.
Several officers inside the agency have raised concerns that the newly aggressive approach, which began roughly two months ago and has been referred to by top D.P.S. officials as a “hold the line” operation, has led to injuries among migrants.
Border Patrol officials have also complained to Texas law enforcement, according to a memo sent to D.P.S. and obtained by The Times, that the proliferation of concertina wire along the river, placed there by Texas National Guard troops, has made it more difficult for border agents to help migrants and could lead to more drownings.
On Friday, more than 80 Democratic representatives in the U.S. House, including all of those from Texas, signed a letter to Mr. Biden urging him to investigate the Operation Lone Star program and stop Mr. Abbott’s “dangerous and cruel actions” by asserting the federal government’s authority over immigration law.
The buoy barriers, announced by Mr. Abbott last month, cover only a small section of the 1,254-mile long border between Mexico and Texas. But their deployment has been a chance for Mr. Abbott to make a direct challenge to Mr. Biden over the issue of border security.
The Texas governor, a Republican in his third term and a former state attorney general, appeared eager to enter a legal fight with the Democratic president over enforcement of immigration law.
“Texas will see you in court, Mr. President,” Mr. Abbott wrote in his letter.
The federal government, in its suit on Monday, focused on the buoy barriers and federal law surrounding navigable waters and did not challenge the other tactics and policies employed by the Abbott administration as part of Operation Lone Star.
Craziness in Texas not only suffered by immigrant.
It’s hard to imagine a more dangerous place for abortion providers than Texas. Doctors who perform abortions face up to life in prison, with civil penalties of at least $100,000. That’s to say nothing of the physical risks: violence against providers and clinics has skyrocketed since Roe was overturned, with a 2022 study showing major increases in stalking, death threats, and invasions.
So you can imagine how OBGYNs felt when they got an email last month from the American Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology (ABOG) telling them they’d have to take their certifying exams in Texas this year.
Dr. Joseph Ottolenghi, a practicing OBGYN in New York City, is supposed to get his board certification this year. But as an abortion provider, he’s understandably fearful. He and his wife, also an OBGYN (who preferred not to be named), talk about the exam and the possible risks every single day.
While he’s in New York, Ottolenghi has shield laws to protect him from any out-of-state prosecutions. “I’m terrified that the second I step foot in Texas I could be arrested,” he says.
ABOG, headquartered in Dallas, is telling candidates that they “should not be at legal risk” because Texas’ criminal and civil penalties only apply to abortions performed in the state. But the group hasn’t addressed the danger for doctors in pro-choice states who ship abortion medication to Texas patients via telehealth—potentially a tremendous criminal risk.
It was also just last week that a group of Republican attorneys general, including Texas AG Ken Paxton, pushed the Biden administration to allow them access to medical records of those who get out-of-state abortions. So if there’s a question of how broadly Texas law enforcement plans to interpret their ban, it seems fair that doctors would want to err on the side of caution.
Especially considering that the exam itself necessitates that some doctors talk about their work in abortion care: In order to be certified, OBGYNs must prepare a list of cases that they’ve worked on and are ready to discuss with a panel of examiners.
For OBGYNs of reproductive age, the threat of traveling to Texas goes beyond legal concerns. Those who are pregnant or considering becoming pregnant aren’t keen on being in a state that would rather let them die than provide them an abortion.
And while ABOG says they have a partnership with a nearby hospital offering “high standards of obstetrical care in medical emergencies,” pregnant OBGYNs know better than anyone what the standard of care is—and that they’ll be unable to get it in Texas. After all, the state is being sued right now by 15 women whose lives and health were endangered by the ban.
There’s also something uniquely terrifying about the idea of hundreds of OBGYNs, many of whom perform abortions, all descending on one publicly-listed building at the same time in a state filled with anti-abortion sentiment, few gun regulations, and a recent spate of mass shootings. (ABOG’s emailed promise that their staff is trained in “active shooter response” isn’t all that reassuring.)
Given the legal, physical, and emotional threats to doctors—testing-taking is anxiety-inducing enough in a state where you’re not afraid of being arrested or killed—there’s no real justification for ABOG’s decision.
It’s plainly unethical to ask doctors to put their freedom and lives at risk over an exam that could be given remotely or in another state.
In fact, the organization has held certifying exams remotely for the last few years. The exams were held online in 2021 due to Covid; and in 2022, ABOG announced the exams would remain remote because of a surge in Covid cases and “concerns regarding the U.S. Supreme Court opinion on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.” (ABOG’s decision that year was also likely influenced by a preemptive outcry from OBGYNs who had heard rumors that the group was considering a return to in-person exams in Texas.)
Given that the exams have been successfully conducted remotely, and that ABOG is explicit in their support for reproductive rights—even threatening to revoke the board certification of doctors who spread misinformation about the procedure—some OBGYNs believe the organization’s insistence on holding the exams in Texas must be a financial one.
The organization is scheduled to open a new $34 million dollar office building later this year. And according to city permits reported by The Dallas Morning News, the 126,000-square-foot space will include the group’s offices, a conference center, and—you guessed it—a testing facility.
If you’re wondering why an organization for OBGYNs would spend that kind of money to permanently set up shop in a state so hostile to women’s rights, you’re not alone. In the organization’s FAQs on the new building, ABOG preempts that particular criticism, writing that “the economic impact of ABOG moving out of Texas will not solve or influence Texas legislation or the current national issues regarding reproductive health.” This language mirrors the group’s 2021 statement defending their decision to remain in Texas after the state passed SB8:
“If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, legislation will once again impact the patient/physician relationship throughout the country. The geographic location of ABOG’s headquarters will not matter.”
But when you’re requiring the nation’s OBGYNs to travel to a place where they could be prosecuted—or their lives endangered—it does matter. Quite a lot.
Because while OBGYNs aren’t legally required to take the exams, being ‘board-certified’ is only theoretically voluntary. Most hospitals and practices require that OBGYNs be board-certified in order to work there, as do most hospitals when granting admitting privileges. It’s also a requirement if you want to have any sort of leadership position at some point in your career, like being a medical director. Health plans also tend to give board-certified doctors higher insurance reimbursement.
All of which is to say: simply forgoing the exams isn’t really an option. For doctors who might be at risk in Texas, it’s a no-win situation: If abortion providers and pregnant OBGYNs decide that traveling to the state is too dangerous, it means that those particular groups will be the ones locked out of the best jobs and leadership roles.
ABOG may offer accommodations to doctors whose anxiety about traveling to Texas would seriously impact their ability to take the exam—but that, too, is an issue of privilege. The doctors most likely to get accommodations are those employed by medical centers with good lawyers and the ability to provide adequate documentation to the organization.
As Ottolenghi gears up for the exam and the possibility of having to go to Texas, he’s decided not to put any abortion cases on the list he’s preparing to submit. “But it only makes me only marginally feel better,” he says. It’s also a morally-fraught decision: If no OBGYNs put abortion cases on their lists, and abortion isn’t discussed and examined in the board certification program, it adds to the abortion-training crisis spreading across the country.
But OBGYNs need to turn their case list in to ABOG in just a few days—by August 1. And at the end of the day, doctors need to ensure that they remain personally safe. What Ottolenghi really wants to know from ABOG? “How do they plan on protecting us?”
==========END————
Thank you, as always, for reading. If you have anything like a spark file, or master thought list (spark file sounds so much cooler), let me know how you use it in the comments below.
If you enjoyed this post, please share it.
If a friend sent this to you, you could subscribe here 👇. All content is free, and paid subscriptions are voluntary.
————
-prada- Adi Mulia Pradana is a Helper. Former adviser (President Indonesia) Jokowi for mapping 2-times election. I used to get paid to catch all these blunders—now I do it for free. Trying to work out what's going on, what happens next. Arch enemies of the tobacco industry, (still) survive after getting doxed. Now figure out, or, prevent catastrophic situations in the Indonesian administration from outside the government. After his mom was nearly killed by a syndicate, now I do it (catch all these blunders, especially blunders by an asshole syndicates) for free. Writer actually facing 12 years attack-simultaneously (physically terror, cyberattack terror) by his (ex) friend in IR UGM / HI UGM (all of them actually indebted to me, at least get a very cheap book). 2 times, my mom nearly got assassinated by my friend with “komplotan” / weird syndicate. Once assassin, forever is assassin, that I was facing in years. I push myself to be (keep) dovish, pacifist, and you can read my pacifist tone in every note I write. A framing that myself propagated for years.
(Very rare compliment and initiative pledge. Thank you. Yes, even a lot of people associated me PRAVDA, not part of MIUCCIA PRADA. I’m literally asshole on debate, since in college). Especially after heated between Putin and Prigozhin. My note-live blog about Russia - Ukraine already click-read 4 millions.
=======
Thanks for reading Prada’s Newsletter. I was lured, inspired by someone writer, his post in LinkedIn months ago, “Currently after a routine daily writing newsletter in the last 10 years, my subscriber reaches 100,000. Maybe one of my subscribers is your boss.” After I get followed / subscribed by (literally) prominent AI and prominent Chief Product and Technology of mammoth global media (both: Sir, thank you so much), I try crafting more / better writing.
To get the ones who really appreciate your writing, and now prominent people appreciate my writing, priceless feeling. Prada ungated/no paywall every notes-but thank you for anyone open initiative pledge to me.
(Promoting to more engage in Substack) Seamless to listen to your favorite podcasts on Substack. You can buy a better headset to listen to a podcast here (GST DE352306207).
Listeners on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Overcast, or Pocket Casts simultaneously. podcasting can transform more of a conversation. Invite listeners to weigh in on episodes directly with you and with each other through discussion threads. At Substack, the process is to build with writers. Podcasts are an amazing feature of the Substack. I wish it had a feature to read the words we have written down without us having to do the speaking. Thanks for reading Prada’s Newsletter.
Headset and Mic can buy in here, but not including this cat, laptop, and couch / sofa.