An Oklahoma District Court judge has issued a temporary restraining order to halt the enactment of a state law, HB 4156, which would criminalize irregular entry and unauthorized stay of noncitizens in Oklahoma. This decision, delivered by Judge Bernard Jones, temporarily blocks the law while legal challenges against it proceed in court. The case, involving plaintiffs such as Padres Unidos de Tulsa and other entities, argues that the state law is preempted by federal immigration regulations.
Judge Jones’ decision provides temporary relief by agreeing with the plaintiffs’ position that there is a high likelihood of success on the merits of their claims. He referenced case law emphasizing that immigration regulation is fundamentally a federal responsibility, stemming from Congress’s creation of a federal framework regulating the entry, presence, and removal of noncitizens.
The core of the issue revolves around the crime of “impermissible occupation,” outlined in Section 2B of the now-blocked HB 4156. This section stipulates that noncitizens found occupying the state without appropriate legal authorization could face up to a year in prison, fines up to $500, or both.
The restraining order was granted amidst ongoing lawsuits, including a challenge initially consolidated with that from the federal government under former President Joe Biden’s administration. However, this complaint was later voluntarily dismissed under President Donald Trump’s administration, leaving the state and its representatives to face ongoing legal scrutiny alone (JURIST).
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Oklahoma has welcomed the court’s temporary block of the law, with Executive Director Tamya Cox-Touré emphasizing the necessity of ensuring immigrants feel safe within their communities, irrespective of their legal status. Cox-Touré stressed the prevailing atmosphere of fear generated by the state’s political rhetoric, affirming continued advocacy for immigrant rights and dignity.
While this legal battle unfolds, Oklahoma’s Attorney General and other state officials remain defendants in the ongoing proceedings set to determine the final outcome regarding the legality of HB 4156. Interested parties continue to await a definitive judgment on the bill’s permanent status.