Passim

Issues › State laws

State immigration-crime laws: Texas S.B. 4 and Iowa S.F. 2340

Partly blocked

In force in Texas; Iowa injunction affirmed

Iowa's certiorari petition pending; U.S. views requested

No court order now stops Texas from enforcing S.B. 4. The en banc Fifth Circuit vacated the first injunction for lack of standing on April 24, 2026, without deciding preemption, and on May 29 a Fifth Circuit panel stayed a new class-action injunction pending appeal. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction against Iowa's S.F. 2340 on October 23, 2025, holding the law likely preempted, and left whom it binds and protects to the district court; no ruling on that was found.

Status as of
October 31, 2026
Dockets checked
November 3, 2026

The policy

Texas S.B. 4 (2023) and Iowa S.F. 2340 (2024) make it a state crime to be in the state after a prior removal or denial of admission, and Texas also makes it a crime to enter from another country away from a port of entry. Both let state judges order people to leave the country and bar courts from pausing prosecutions while federal immigration cases are pending. Noncitizens, immigrant-rights organizations and El Paso County challenge them as preempted by federal law; the United States sued too but dropped both suits in 2025. This page tracks the Texas and Iowa laws.

Court rulings

Rulings on the policy by court. Stay and procedural rulings say what the court did and aren't counted in the circuit row.

  1. 1No ruling
  2. 2No ruling
  3. 3No ruling
  4. 4No ruling
  5. 5No ruling
  6. 6No ruling
  7. 7No ruling
  8. 8Against
  9. 9No ruling
  10. 10No ruling
  11. 11No ruling
  12. DCNo ruling
  • Ruled against the policy
  • Upheld the policy
  • Mixed or split
  • No merits ruling tracked
CourtRulingCaseNote
5th Cir. Injunction vacated for lack of standingProcedural ruling United States v. TexasNo. 24-50149 · Apr 24, 2026 Texas S.B. 4. En banc court vacated the injunction because the organizational and county plaintiffs lacked standing; preemption not decided.
W.D. Tex. Ruled against the policyPreliminary ruling L.M.L. v. MartinNo. 1:26-cv-01170 · May 14, 2026 Texas S.B. 4. Enjoined the reentry, refusal-to-comply, return-order and no-abatement provisions for the plaintiffs and a provisional class; stayed May 29.
5th Cir. Injunction stayed pending appealStay ruling L.M.L. v. MartinNo. 1:26-cv-01170 · May 29, 2026 Texas S.B. 4. Unpublished order staying the L.M.L. injunction pending appeal (No. 26-50418), without reasons; Judge Southwick would deny.
8th Cir. Ruled against the policyPreliminary ruling Brenna Bird v. Iowa Migrant Movement for JusticeNo. 26-49 · Oct 23, 2025 Iowa S.F. 2340. Affirmed the preliminary injunction; law likely preempted; remanded on scope. Cert petition No. 26-49 pending; U.S. views requested.

Who's covered

  • States: TX

    Texas: no court order currently stops S.B. 4. The 2024 preliminary injunction in United States v. Texas was vacated on April 24, 2026. The May 14, 2026 injunction in L.M.L. v. Martin barred enforcement of Penal Code 51.03 and 51.04 and Code of Criminal Procedure articles 5B.002 and 5B.003 for the named plaintiffs and a provisional class, but the Fifth Circuit stayed it pending appeal on May 29.

    Source

  • States: IA

    Iowa injunction affirmed; scope on remand not verified. The district court ordered that "Defendants are hereby ENJOINED from enforcing Senate File 2340 pending further proceedings." The defendants in this case are Attorney General Bird and the Polk and Clayton County Attorneys. The Eighth Circuit affirmed but directed the district court to decide whether a narrower injunction is appropriate under Trump v. CASA, including whom it binds and whom it protects. No ruling on that remand was found.

    Source

For practitioners

  • Texas S.B. 4 makes it a state crime to enter Texas directly from a foreign nation away from a lawful port of entry (Penal Code 51.02) and to enter, attempt to enter or be found in Texas after a denial of admission or removal (51.03). It lets state judges order people returned to the foreign nation they entered from (Code of Criminal Procedure art. 5B.002), makes refusing to comply a crime (51.04), and bars abating a prosecution for pending federal immigration proceedings (art. 5B.003). The L.M.L. injunction didn't cover the entry crime. [1]
  • The en banc Fifth Circuit's April 24, 2026 decision rested only on standing; the remaining plaintiffs were two organizations and El Paso County, after the United States dismissed its claims in March 2025. L.M.L. v. Martin was filed on May 4, 2026 by noncitizens directly subject to the law. The Fifth Circuit's May 29 stay order gives no reasons, and the appeal (No. 26-50418) is pending. [1][2][3]
  • The Eighth Circuit held that the individual plaintiffs and Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice likely have standing and that S.F. 2340's reentry crime, removal-order provision and no-abatement provision likely conflict with federal immigration law. Rehearing was denied on February 4, 2026. [1][2]
  • Iowa's petition (No. 26-49) asks whether plaintiffs have pre-enforcement standing when the only alleged injury comes from "declaredly unenforced applications" of a statute, and whether overlap between state and federal immigration crimes is enough for obstacle preemption on the law's face. On October 19, 2026, the Court invited the Solicitor General to file a brief. The order sets no deadline and doesn't grant review or change the injunction. [1][2][3]

In plain language

Texas and Iowa passed laws that make it a state crime for some immigrants to be in the state, mainly people who were deported or turned away before and came back. Texas's law also makes it a crime to cross into Texas from another country away from an official border crossing. Under both laws, a state judge can order a person to leave the country. Right now Texas can enforce its law, because an appeals court paused the order that had blocked it. In Iowa, a court order stops the attorney general and two county prosecutors from enforcing the law, and a lower court still has to decide how far that order reaches. Iowa has asked the Supreme Court to take its case. An immigration lawyer can tell you what applies to you.

Find free or low-cost legal help

New on the dockets, not yet reviewed

Court actions picked up from the dockets after the last review. They're quoted as filed and don't change the status until they're checked against the order.

  • ORDER GRANTING 60 Motion to Stay Case Pending Appeal. Signed by Judge David A. Ezra. (cc3) (Entered: 06/12/2026)

    L.M.L. v. Martin · W.D. Tex. No. 1:26-cv-01170, entry 61 · Docket entry

How we got here

  1. Supreme Court requested Solicitor General's views on Iowa petition

    Brenna Bird v. Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice · U.S. Supreme Court · Source

  2. Supreme Court distributed Iowa petition for October 16 conference

    Brenna Bird v. Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice · U.S. Supreme Court · Source

  3. Supreme Court rescheduled Iowa state-enforcement petition

    Brenna Bird v. Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice · U.S. Supreme Court · Source

  4. Supreme Court distributed Iowa petition for October 9 conference

    Brenna Bird v. Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice · U.S. Supreme Court · Source

  5. Supreme Court rescheduled Iowa petition

    Brenna Bird v. Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice · U.S. Supreme Court · Source

  6. Iowa sought Supreme Court review of state illegal-reentry injunction

    Brenna Bird v. Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice · U.S. Supreme Court · Source

  7. Fifth Circuit stayed S.B. 4 injunction pending appeal

    L.M.L. v. Martin · W.D. Tex. · Source

  8. Western District of Texas preliminarily enjoined key S.B. 4 provisions

    L.M.L. v. Martin · W.D. Tex. · Source

  9. Western District of Texas granted preliminary injunction against key S.B. 4 provisions

    L.M.L. v. Martin · W.D. Tex. · Source

  10. Noncitizen plaintiffs filed follow-on S.B. 4 class action

    L.M.L. v. Martin · W.D. Tex. · Source

  11. En banc Fifth Circuit vacated prior S.B. 4 injunction on standing grounds

    L.M.L. v. Martin · W.D. Tex. · Source

  12. En banc Fifth Circuit vacated S.B. 4 injunction

    United States v. Texas · 5th Cir. · Source

Show all 14

  1. Fifth Circuit panel affirmed S.B. 4 injunction

    United States v. Texas · 5th Cir. · Source

  2. District court preliminarily enjoined S.B. 4

    United States v. Texas · 5th Cir. · Source

Status changes

Selected changes since May 29, 2026, each with the order behind it.

  • In force in Texas; Iowa injunction affirmed. Fifth Circuit stayed the L.M.L. injunction of S.B. 4 pending appeal; Iowa's injunction remained in place Source

Cases (3)

CaseCourtLatestAs of
Brenna Bird v. Iowa Migrant Movement for JusticeNo. 26-49 · Lead caseU.S. Supreme CourtSupreme Court invited Solicitor General's views on Iowa state-enforcement petitionOct 19, 2026
L.M.L. v. MartinNo. 1:26-cv-01170 · Class actionW.D. Tex.Fifth Circuit stayed S.B. 4 injunction pending appealMay 29, 2026
United States v. TexasNo. 24-501495th Cir.Fifth Circuit en banc vacated S.B. 4 injunction on standingApr 24, 2026

In the news

Every status statement on this page links to the order it rests on. Docket entries marked "not yet reviewed" are quoted as filed. How we track litigation