Three Drowning Deaths at U.S.-Mexico Border Highlight Tensions Between Texas and Federal Government Over Jurisdiction

Eagle Pass, Texas Mexico
Standoff between Texas and federal government over jurisdiction
Surge in illegal border crossings
Three drowning deaths at U.S.-Mexico border
Two migrants in distress on the U.S side of the river near Shelby Park boat ramp around 9 p.m.
Woman and two children from Mexico drowned
Three Drowning Deaths at U.S.-Mexico Border Highlight Tensions Between Texas and Federal Government Over Jurisdiction

A surge in illegal border crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border has resulted in a standoff between Texas and the federal government over jurisdiction and how to address the crisis.

On Friday, Mexican officials notified Border Patrol of two migrants in distress on the U.S. side of the river near Shelby Park boat ramp around 9 p.m., resulting in three drowning deaths: a woman and two children from Mexico.

The incident has highlighted tensions between Texas and federal authorities over jurisdiction, with state officials blocking Border Patrol's access to a 2.5-mile stretch of the border near Eagle Pass, including Shelby Park. The area was fenced off by Texas authorities using gates and razor wire.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has been involved in multiple legal battles with the Department of Justice (DOJ) over his migrant deterrent tactics, which include installing razor wire along parts of the southern border and a circular saw floating barrier in the Rio Grande river. The Biden administration has criticized these methods as dangerous and cruel.

In response to recent Supreme Court rulings allowing U.S. Border Patrol agents to temporarily remove razor wire installed by Texas officials, Governor Abbott issued statements declaring Texas' right to self-defense and expressing that the issue is not over.

The Houston Chronicle, Texas' largest newspaper, has criticized Governor Abbott for defying the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on razor wire at the border and compared him to former Alabama Governor George Wallace during the civil rights movement.

Abbott remains firm in his stance against federal intervention in Texas border control efforts, citing constitutional authority granted to states for self-defense amidst an invasion.



Confidence

100%

No Doubts Found At Time Of Publication

Sources

73%

  • Unique Points
    • , The U.S.-Mexico border is facing a surge in illegal border crossings.
    • , President Joe Biden is open to 'massive changes' on border policy at the U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting at the White House last week.
    • A bipartisan group of senators are currently working on a new border policy initiative.
  • Accuracy
    • Greg Abbott has been in multiple legal battles with the Department of Justice (DOJ) over his migrant deterrent tactics.
    • The U.S.-Mexico border is facing a surge in illegal border crossings.
    • The Biden administration has called these tactics 'dangerous' and 'cruel'.
  • Deception (80%)
    The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Abbott has been in multiple legal battles with the Department of Justice (DOJ) over his migrant deterrent tactics when this is not entirely accurate. The article mentions only one such battle - the Supreme Court ruling on razor wire at the U.S.-Mexico border which was temporary and allowed for litigation to proceed. Secondly, Abbott's statement that Texas has a right to self-defense is misleading as it implies that he is defending his state from an external threat when in reality, he is using tactics such as razor wire and circular saw barriers to deter migrants who are attempting to cross the border legally. The article also compares Abbott's actions to those of former Alabama Governor George Wallace which is a false comparison as they were dealing with different issues - one being segregation and the other being illegal immigration. Lastly, the article claims that there was an increase in illegal border crossings during 2023 when this information is not accurate as it refers to data from before 2023.
    • The author claims that Abbott has been in multiple legal battles with the DOJ over his migrant deterrent tactics. However, the article mentions only one such battle - the Supreme Court ruling on razor wire at the U.S.-Mexico border which was temporary and allowed for litigation to proceed.
    • Abbott's statement that Texas has a right to self-defense is misleading as it implies that he is defending his state from an external threat when in reality, he is using tactics such as razor wire and circular saw barriers to deter migrants who are attempting to cross the border legally.
  • Fallacies (75%)
    The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against Governor Abbott's use of razor wire at the border without providing any evidence or context for this ruling.
    • >Abbott, a former Texas Supreme Court justice, apparently thinks he knows better than the highest court in the nation what the U.S. Constitution says.<br>The governor of a state that has maimed migrants with razor wire, deprived them of water in the summer and left to them to drown in the river is arguing self-defense.
  • Bias (80%)
    The article contains examples of political bias and religious bias. The author uses language that depicts one side as extreme or unreasonable by calling the governor's actions 'dangerous' and 'cruel'. Additionally, the author compares Abbott to a segregationist who was in office during the civil rights movement, which is an example of ideological bias. The article also contains examples of monetary bias as it mentions that Texas officials put up razor wire under Abbott's orders while litigation over the issue proceeded.
    • Additionally, the author compares Abbott to a segregationist who was in office during the civil rights movement.
      • The article also contains examples of monetary bias as it mentions that Texas officials put up razor wire under Abbott's orders while litigation over the issue proceeded.
        • The author uses language that depicts one side as extreme or unreasonable by calling the governor's actions 'dangerous' and 'cruel'.
        • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
          Rachel Dobkin has a conflict of interest on the topics of Greg Abbott and Texas as she is an employee of The Houston Chronicle which is owned by Hearst Communications. Hearst Communications also owns U.S.-Mexico border news outlets such as El Paso Times, San Antonio Express-News, and Corpus Christi Caller-Times.
          • Rachel Dobkin's employer The Houston Chronicle is owned by Hearst Communications which also owns U.S.-Mexico border news outlets.
          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
            Rachel Dobkin has a conflict of interest on the topics of Greg Abbott and Texas as she is reporting for Newsweek which is owned by IAC Media. Additionally, her article mentions the Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S.-Mexico border which are also relevant to these topics.
            • Dobkin mentions the Department of Justice (DOJ) when writing about how they are suing Texas over its immigration policies.
              • Rachel Dobkin reports on the Supreme Court's decision in Abbott v. Texas, where she writes 'Greg Abbott has been defying a federal court order that requires him to stop building barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border.'

              66%

              • Unique Points
                • Texas has again rebuffed demands from the Biden administration for full access to the Shelby Park area of Eagle Pass amid an ongoing standoff between the federal government and the state.
                • The Department of Homeland Security had written to Attorney General Ken Paxton this week seeking full access to the Shelby Park area currently obstructed by Texas after Gov. Greg Abbott's administration had taken control of it earlier this month.
                • Border Patrol has no plans to remove razor wire set up by Texas amid a feud with the Biden administration.
              • Accuracy
                No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
              • Deception (50%)
                The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the title claims that Texas has rebuffed demands from the Biden administration for full access to a disputed border area. However, this statement is misleading because it implies that there was an agreement or understanding between Texas and DHS regarding access to the Shelby Park area of Eagle Pass. In reality, DHS had repeatedly sought access to the area and in response last week Texas said it will allow entry to any Border Patrol personnel responding to an emergency. This means that there never was a demand for full access by DHS, only a request for unrestricted access during emergencies and regular access to the port of entry, boat ramp, and border barrier entrances. Secondly, the article quotes Paxton dismissing the legal basis for DHS's demand. However, this statement is also misleading because it implies that there was a clear-cut legal dispute between Texas and DHS regarding ownership rights to certain areas in Shelby Park. In reality, Paxton disputes the claim that the federal government has rights over these areas based on publicly available records suggesting that the United States does not even purport to own what its latest letter claims. This means that there was no clear-cut legal dispute between Texas and DHS regarding ownership rights to certain areas in Shelby Park, only a disagreement about who owns them. Finally, the article quotes Paxton dismissing claims by the administration that it needs access to the area to patrol the border. However, this statement is also misleading because it implies that there was an agreement or understanding between Texas and DHS regarding how to patrol the border in Shelby Park. In reality, Border Patrol has no plans to remove razor wire set up by Texas unless in an emergency, which means that they do not need access to the area for patrolling purposes.
                • The article claims that Texas rebuffed demands from DHS for full access to a disputed border area. However, this statement is misleading because there was never a demand for full access by DHS.
              • Fallacies (100%)
                None Found At Time Of Publication
              • Bias (0%)
                The article is biased in favor of the Biden administration and against Texas. The author uses phrases such as 'invasion', 'undermine', and 'disregardţ to portray the state of Texas as an obstacle to federal law enforcement and a source of conflict. The author also implies that the Biden administration is acting in a humane and orderly way, while Texas is causing problems for Border Patrol agents. The article does not provide any evidence or context for these claims, nor does it acknowledge the perspective of Texas officials who argue they are protecting their state's sovereignty and constitutional rights.
                • The Biden administration has also sued over the Texas law, recently signed by Abbott, that allows state and local law enforcement to arrest illegal immigrants. There has been another legal feud over the establishment of buoys by Texas in the Rio Grande.
                • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                  None Found At Time Of Publication
                • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                  None Found At Time Of Publication

                64%

                • Unique Points
                  • The drowning deaths of a woman and two children from Mexico near the US-Mexico border have magnified the rift between Texas and federal officials over who has jurisdiction in that part of the Rio Grande area and how to tackle the migrant crisis.
                  • Around 9 p.m. Friday, Mexican officials advised Border Patrol of two migrants in distress on the US side of the river in the area near Shelby Park boat ramp.
                • Accuracy
                  No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                • Deception (50%)
                  The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that the drowning deaths of a woman and two children from Mexico near the US-Mexico border have magnified the rift between Texas and federal officials over who has jurisdiction in that part of the Rio Grande area and how to tackle the migrant crisis. However, this statement is misleading as there are no details provided about what caused their deaths or any connection to a rift with federal officials.
                  • The article states that Mexican authorities advised Border Patrol of two migrants in distress on the US side of the river in the area near Shelby Park, Texas. However, this statement is false as there are no details provided about what happened or who was involved.
                • Fallacies (85%)
                  The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the drowning deaths as a 'tragedy' and accuses Texas officials of being firm in their continued efforts to exercise complete control over the border even in emergency circumstances. This is an example of an appeal to emotion, which is not a logical argument. Additionally, there are several instances where the author uses dichotomous depictions when describing Mexico as 'firm' and Texas as 'blocking Border Patrol'. This creates a false sense of opposition between two sides that may not be entirely accurate. Finally, the article contains an example of inflammatory rhetoric when it describes Gov. Abbott's policies as 'cruel', which is subjective and does not provide any evidence to support this claim.
                  • The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the drowning deaths as a 'tragedy'
                  • This creates a false sense of opposition between two sides that may not be entirely accurate
                  • The article contains an example of inflammatory rhetoric when it describes Gov. Abbott's policies as 'cruel'
                • Bias (100%)
                  None Found At Time Of Publication
                • Site Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                  The article by Rosa Flores, Holly Yan, Sara Weisfeldt and Devan Cole reports on the drownings of three Mexican migrants near Eagle Pass in Texas. The authors have a conflict of interest with Mexico as they are reporting on events that occurred at the US-Mexico border.
                  • The article mentions that one of the victims was from Tamaulipas, Mexico and another was from Guerrero, Mexico.
                  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                    The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of immigration policy as they are reporting for CNN which is known to have liberal views on this issue.

                    80%

                    • Unique Points
                      • The state of Texas has the constitutional right to defend itself and is using every tool and strategy, including razor wire fences, to secure the border.
                      • Greg Abbott issued a statement on Wednesday declaring Texas's right to self-defense.
                    • Accuracy
                      No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                    • Deception (50%)
                      The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that almost all of the U.S Republican governors have signed on a statement backing Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's fight against federal government over border control when only 25 states did so and Phil Scott from Vermont did not sign onto it to support him.
                      • The author claims that almost all of the U.S Republican governors have signed on a statement backing Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's fight against federal government over border control when only 25 states did so and Phil Scott from Vermont did not sign onto it to support him.
                      • The article mentions that the White House addressed the governors' statement at a press briefing but does not provide any quotes or details about what they said.
                    • Fallacies (80%)
                      The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the statement of a group of governors without providing any evidence or reasoning for their position. Additionally, the author makes a false dilemma by presenting only two options: support Texas or not support Texas. This is misleading because there are other ways to address border control issues that do not involve taking sides in this particular dispute.
                      • The statement released Thursday on the Republican Governors Association website criticized the Biden Administration and said the state of Texas has the constitutional right to defend itself.
                    • Bias (85%)
                      The article is highly biased towards the Republican party and their stance on border control. The author uses language that dehumanizes immigrants and portrays them as a threat to national security. They also use quotes from politicians without providing context or critically analyzing their statements.
                      • Almost all of the U.S. Republican governors have signed on a statement backing Texas Gov. Greg Abbott
                        • Republican governors support Texas' constitutional claim, but don't supply material support
                          • The White House addressed the governors' statement at a press briefing Friday
                          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication

                          65%

                          • Unique Points
                            • Greg Abbott has been in multiple legal battles with the Department of Justice (DOJ) over his migrant deterrent tactics.
                            • The U.S.-Mexico border is facing a surge in illegal border crossings.
                            • Former segregationist George Wallace ordered the police to close Alabama's public schools in Huntsville, Mobile, Tuskegee and Birmingham in 1963, defying federal orders to integrate the state's schools.
                          • Accuracy
                            No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                          • Deception (30%)
                            The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses sensationalism by stating that President Biden federalizing the National Guard would be a 'boneheaded move' and a 'total disaster'. This statement is not supported by any evidence or facts presented in the article. Secondly, when discussing Texas' decision to ignore Supreme Court decisions approving razor wire barriers, the author uses selective reporting by only mentioning that Texas continued construction along the border but does not provide any context on why this was done. Lastly, when stating that Abbott has provided letters with 'enough immediate solutions', it is unclear what these solutions are and how they would address the issue at hand.
                            • When discussing Texas' decision to ignore Supreme Court decisions approving razor wire barriers, the author uses selective reporting by only mentioning that Texas continued construction along the border but does not provide any context on why this was done.
                            • The author uses sensationalism by stating that President Biden federalizing the National Guard would be a 'boneheaded move' and a 'total disaster'.
                          • Fallacies (70%)
                            The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority when they quote Governor Abbott saying that Texas is prepared for the unlikely event of President Biden federalizing the National Guard. This statement assumes that Governor Abbott's opinion on this matter is accurate and reliable, which may not be true. Additionally, the author uses a dichotomous depiction by presenting only two options: either President Biden will federalize the National Guard or he won't. The article does not consider any other possibilities or perspectives on this issue.
                            • Governor Abbott said Texas is prepared in the unlikely event that President Biden federalizes the National Guard as the standoff over the southern border heats up.
                          • Bias (85%)
                            Lauren Irwin uses language that dehumanizes and demonizes immigrants. She also implies that the governor is justified in his actions because of a perceived threat to national security.
                            • > Well, first, I'd be shocked. That would be a boneheaded move on his part, total disaster,
                            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                              Lauren Irwin has a conflict of interest on the topic of Texas National Guard as she is an employee of The Hill which is owned by News Corporation. This company also owns Fox News and other conservative media outlets that have been critical of President Biden's immigration policies.
                              • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                Lauren Irwin has conflicts of interest on the topics of Texas National Guard and immigration laws. She is a member of the Republican Party which may influence her coverage.