NYC Mayor Issues Exec. Order Targeting Buses Carrying Migrants With Seizure

P. Gardner Goldsmith | December 31, 2023
Text Audio
00:00 00:00
Font Size


Perhaps due to the daily barrage of stories revealing vast immigration disputes in the US, many Americans might feel twisted, darkly ironic satisfaction seeing one of the highest profile proponents of “sanctuary cities” and unchecked immigration appear, month-by-month, to be changing his proverbial “tune.”

Indeed, New York City Mayor Eric Adams (D), seems to be growing more averse to “unlimited immigration,” and on December 27, the big honcho of the Big Apple once more went “high-profile,” announcing his issuance of an “Executive Order” that appears to be part of a showy “game of chicken” with Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R), that looks like another desperate attempt to get the $34 Trillion-in-Debt feds to hand his city more cash, and…

...Which easily can be challenged on constitutional grounds.

Adams is targeting chartered buses from Texas which may or may not carry migrants put on those buses by agents of the Lone Star government under orders by Abbott, and the NYC Mayor said:

“Today, I’m announcing an Executive Order requiring charter buses transporting migrants – those often contracted by the state of Texas – to provide 32-hours-notice in advance of their arrival into New York City…”



If the buses fail to comply, Adams has declared it a class B misdemeanor, that could result in fines and/or the impounding of the violating buses.

On a practical level, Adams’ “Executive Order” easily can be circumvented. As Leah Barkoukis reports for TownHall, after Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D) instituted a similar Gestapo-like edict last month, bus drivers simply changed their destinations.

“Bus operators in Chicago have gone around the new rules by dropping illegal border crossers off in suburbs, and Gov. Abbott has also flown them to the city instead.” 

Additionally, charter buses from Texas can stop outside the city or state of NY and allow new buses from other states to take the passengers into NYC.

Adams’ issuance of this magical “order” seems completely decoupled from any “mayoral powers" the city, state, or federal statutes and constitutions might allow.

Likewise, any decent lawyer will have a field day pointing out the numerous ways in which Adams’ plan flouts nearly half of the Bill of Rights.

Regardless, Adams added:

“To make sure we have sufficient staffing, we are also requiring that these charter buses arrive only between 8:30 Am and 12 PM, Monday through Friday, and to only drop off passengers at one spot, unless directed otherwise by New York City Emergency Management.”

Which is about as moral, constitutional, and practically enforceable as commanding Uber drivers to not pick up people outside those morning hours, and telling drivers and riders where they may and may not disembark.

As End Wokeness posted on December 29, bus drivers and passengers aren’t paying Adams any heed.

“2 days ago, NY Mayor Eric Adams signed an executive order to curb the flow of migrant buses from Texas. For the second night in a row, buses from Texas are defying his order.”

But, regardless of Adams’ lack of forethought and stunning lack of enforcement capacity, there are deeper points to take away from this.

As noted, his attempt to control people driving buses from other states and to demand IDs from drivers indicates Adams' assumption that he can disregard the Fourth Amendment and demand “PAPERS PLEASE” of anyone driving a bus into the city.

Clearly, this tactic is reminiscent of a totalitarian state, and it might prompt a few freedom-backers to wonder how American cities and states got to the point where, without judge-issued, public warrants, police agents of government can demand IDs, demand “license” permission slips, “stop and frisk” people (as they tried in NY a few years ago, contrary to the Fourth Amendment), and prohibit business operation without a trial or accusation of a crime.

Those all being contrary to the Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments.

Adams doesn’t seem concerned with the Constitution.

Admittedly, the Biden Administration’s lack of border enforcement can inspire feelings of anger and frustration among those who see a bankrupt US government adding human burdens to welfarism, police needs, and other day-to-day factors in the operation of the nation and the various states.

Related: Biden Border Patrol To Work Like Travel Agents INSIDE Mexico?

But – despite it appearing to be minutiae -- a close reading of the US Constitution during this explosive time also allows us to see a peculiar difference between what the feds are allowed to do for “immigration” policing in Texas versus what the Constitution might be claimed to grant for the feds to do in NY.

Article One Section Nine of the US Constitution is the only portion of the Constitution that might be mis-interpreted as pertaining to the voluntary movement of people from another nation to the states, or from state to state -- and, in fact, it only applies to the original thirteen states, not to Texas or any other state, and really focuses on the importation of slaves, reading:

“The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person."

In fact, Texas included a state Bureau of Immigration in its constitution when it was adopted. So, there is a lot to learn in the current immigration conflagration – a lot of legal scholarship that lets one see what the Founders intended and how utterly screwed up the current “look to DC for the answers” is.

But in a world where, after being so overtly pro-open-borders, people like Adams now grandstand and even call on the federal government to hand them more money to “handle the crisis,” it’s important to see how and why this problem exists.

Biden’s mismanagement of the immigration matter might be intentional, but the reliance on federal answers for what is supposed to be a state issue is not going to see long-term security.

And moves like Adams’ will simply see more erosion of the Bill of Rights.


Follow MRCTV on X!