Texas has been embroiled in litigation against the federal government on many issues, including rules on school toilets, immigration, and abortion facilities. State cases against the federal government are on the rise, and as such, it can be said that Washington is not excited about it.
Texas and other states have filed a federal complaint contesting President Obama’s executive orders on immigration issues. The states protested that his legislative duty of upholding the laws and increasing the pressure on state finances was ignored by the president. President Obama had announced that the federal government would provide work permits and protection to approximately five million immigrants in the United States. The states challenged the president by arguing that he was abdicating his responsibility to enforce laws enacted by the Congress and therefore, engaged in the act of trying to rewrite immigration laws and he had no authority to do so. Mr. Abbott, the attorney general stated that Texas was qualified to challenge Obama_x0092_s executive order since Texas had suffered the brunt of drug-associated cross-border crime as well as illegal immigration, which as a result, affected its operations and efforts to solve such issues. Republicans in Texas have consistently attacked the federal government on immigration policies (Montgomery & Julia, 2014).
Furthermore, Texas and other ten states filed a lawsuit challenging the federal government over guidance about directing schools to permit transgender students to utilize restrooms and other facilities related to their gender identities. Such issues also arose in California in 2013 when the provisions of DOMA and Proposition 8 policies limited gay marriages ( Mihalkanin, Ruger & Mora, 2014). The Supreme Court later struck out section 3 of DOMA provisions and dismissed Proposition 8 as unconstitutional. Based on the issue of transgender discrimination in schools, the states argued that there was no room in schools for discrimination including the discrimination against transgender students or any other form of discernment against students. The Attorney General Lynch wrote a letter to the federal government concerning the Texas lawsuit. Lynch stated that the letter contained a guidance that permitted parents, teachers, and administrators the necessary tools to protect transgender students from discrimination. Several State officials from Texas accused the president of issuing directives on matters that should be handled by the Congress. The Governor of Texas stated that Texas filed the lawsuit to protect district schools against the policy that restricted the use of bathrooms in schools. However, the officials of the federal government denied the allegations of gender discrimination and argued that the directive from the president was intended to safeguard the privacy of the students (Berman and Moriah, 2016).
The federal government appealed a court debate limiting out-of-state handgun purchase. Former President Obama stated that he would increase national licensing to promote background checks and provide new resources to the agencies that are responsible for enforcing gun laws and licensed dealers. A group of Texas officials opposed the president_x0092_s move on handgun transfer ban. The officials argued that the gun control policy interferes with the constitutional rights of the law-abiding citizens. One of the judges in the Texas Northern District Federal court agreed with the Texas officials that federal laws were unconstitutional and they undermine the rights of the states to administer their gun laws (Paul, 2016). The arguments are often supported by the belief that any policy on gun control interferes with the rights of persons enshrined in the Second Amendment. The above issues show the existing relations between states, individuals and the federal government ( Mihalkanin, Ruger & Mora, 2014).
Mihalkanin, E., Ruger, W., & Mora, S. (2014). State of texas: Government, politics, and policy. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.