OKLAHOMA CITY – The Department of Justice (DOJ) and 22 state attorneys general have filed separate briefs with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in support of Attorney General Gentner Drummond’s fight to enforce the immigration enforcement law he first requested in March of 2024.
A preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Bernard Jones currently blocks enforcement of the law. The Biden Administration initially sued over the law, but the Trump Administration dropped the government’s lawsuit. The case is now Padres Unidos de Tulsa v. Drummond.
Drummond called on legislative leaders in March of 2024 to pass a law that would make illegal immigration a state crime, mirroring federal law so Drummond’s agents and law enforcement across Oklahoma could make arrests and prosecute illegal immigrants. At the time, the Biden Administration was refusing to enforce federal immigration law and failing to secure the southern border, resulting in millions of criminal illegals invading the country. Drummond encountered hundreds of these criminals as he cracked down on illegal marijuana grow operations run by Mexican drug cartels and Chinese crime syndicates.
“I called on the legislature to act because the Biden Administration was refusing to secure the border and enforce the law,” Drummond said. “We still suffer the consequences today. We deserve the right to protect ourselves from criminal illegal immigrants when the federal government refuses.”
The response to Drummond’s call to action was House Bill 4156. Drummond’s request was deemed so important that the bill was authored by the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, ensuring its passage. The Governor signed the bill on April 30, 2024.
Drummond has been battling in federal court to enforce the law ever since. Now he is supported by President Trump’s DOJ and 22 of his fellow state attorneys general. In separate briefs filed Friday, the DOJ and state attorneys general ask the court to vacate the injunction blocking House Bill 4156.
“Oklahoma enacted House Bill 4156 into law last year, seeking to do its part to redress the crisis of illegal immigration that was brought upon the United States during the prior administration,” reads the DOJ brief. “House Bill 4156 thus complements existing federal immigration law by punishing those within, or that come within, Oklahoma’s regulatory reach who previously entered or reentered the country in violation of U.S. immigration law.”
The brief filed by Drummond’s fellow state attorneys general was authored by Iowa and notes many states have followed suit in passing their own laws to address illegal immigration within their borders.
“Many States have enacted state crimes of illegal reentry,” reads the Iowa brief. “Those complements to federal law are no conflict or obstacle to federal immigration law. Instead, they help States support federal immigration enforcement goals. Just as many States also criminalize possession of scheduled drugs that the federal government has labeled criminal, so too do States now criminalize a limited set of immigration offenses that the federal government has already labeled criminal.”
Drummond said he is thankful for the support and expects the case to ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
“I appreciate the strong support of President Trump’s Department of Justice and that of my fellow attorneys general from across the country,” Drummond said. “Every Oklahoman should be proud to know that not only is President Trump securing the border and deporting illegal immigrants, he also is supporting our right to enforce appropriate state laws against illegal immigration. This approach aligns with federal law, and it is crucial in my fight to continue shutting down the massive number of illegal marijuana grows run by Mexican drug cartels and Chinese foreign nationals. I’m hopeful the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals will rule in our favor.”
Drummond filed a comprehensive response opposing the injunction earlier this year after advocacy groups led by Padres Unidos De Tulsa sought to halt the law while their legal challenge proceeds. The plaintiffs were allowed to proceed with their legal challenge despite two of the individuals remaining anonymous because to reveal their identities would “expos(e) them to federal authorities” for federal lawbreaking, according to the court.
Drummond has argued that federal lawbreakers cannot claim legal standing to challenge a state law that mirrors federal immigration statutes. He contends that granting relief to the plaintiffs would “plainly subvert federal criminal law in the name of upholding it.”
Drummond’s legal battle to enforce Oklahoma’s law is playing out at the same time the State of Texas is arguing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to enforce a similar law. Drummond said in his initial call for action, “The Supreme Court may well be poised to set new precedent allowing state law enforcement to act.” He and other legal experts believe the question of whether states may enforce laws designed to complement federal immigration law is likely to be decided by the High Court.
Read President Trump’s DOJ brief and the Iowa-led brief.
