Vickers v. Biden - District Court

This case challenges a veritable kitchen sink of immigration programs and policies on behalf of two Texas counties (Kinney and Atascosa), Kinney County Sheriff Brad Coe, and Michael Vickers, a veterinarian who owns a ranch about 70 miles from the border. Represented by an anti-immigrant legal nonprofit based in Washington, D.C., they challenge the following:

• Four family reunification programs created in July 2023 that permit nationals of Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras who have been approved for a family-based visa but who are waiting for a visa to become available (because they are numerically capped each year) to be considered for a grant of “parole” - a statutorily authorized form of temporary permission for a non-citizen to live in the United States. 
• The “CHNV” parole programs for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans that are currently being challenged by Texas.
• The CBP One app, which is currently being challenged by Texas and a multi-state coalition led by Indiana.
• DHS’s Border Wall plan that is already subject to a permanent injunction.
• The termination of the “Migration Protection Protocols” (aka “Remain in Mexico”), which is still being challenged in a case brought by Texas.
• The same Immigration enforcement guidance from September 2021 that was at issue in USA v. Texas, in which the Supreme Court held that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing, and which Sheriff Coe and Kinney County already challenged (unsuccessfully).

Plaintiffs allege that all of these programs and policies violate the President’s constitutional duty to “Take Care” that the laws are faithfully executed as well as the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), for the alleged failure to consider environmental impacts. Plaintiffs also allege that the use of parole in the family reunification and CHNV programs and through the CBP One app exceeds the authority Congress granted in the parole statute.

The federal government has not yet appeared in the case.