The Fourth in Beyoncé's America, where the message was bright and clear

Also: The Fifth Circuit keeps Texas’s criminal immigration law on hold for now. And: Law Dork in the media. Finally, for paid subscribers: Closing my tabs.

On the Fourth of July, I celebrated with Beyoncé — and somewhere around 50,000 others. It wasn’t an overtly political event in one sense, and yet — with somewhere around 50,000 people there from the D.C. area — you’d forgive us for finding the political within.

Of course, though, we didn’t have to look far. There is, given her place in the world, and as Tressie McMillan Cottom laid out so well when Cowboy Carter came out, a political nature to Beyoncé’s essence: “Just by being Black, a woman, popular and impervious to country music’s gatekeepers, Beyoncé has made a political album.”

Although Beyoncé is rarely explicitly political, a consistent theme sprinkled throughout her music is the essential role of Black artists throughout American music and — perhaps made most explicit with Cowboy Carter — the ways Black artists have been excluded from that story (by white people), along with her demand that that exclusion is at its end.

As McMillan Cottom put it, “When she sings another genre in her body, she interprets that genre through her identity. The result can make you dance, but it can also make you reckon with your complicity in that genre’s policing of who is and is not legitimately American.”

What better way — in this moment — to actually, truly celebrate the Fourth of July than with an artist forcing that message into the world?

Beyoncé made herself clear on the Fourth.

“Can you hear me?”

[Audience goes wild.]

“Do you fear me?”

[Audience goes wilder.]

“Can we stand for something? Now is the time to face the wind.”

Indeed.

The song, of course, was “Ameriican Requiem,” with its own political message.

And, minutes later, as an amped-up National Anthem gave way to “Freedom,” the message was indelible minutes outside of D.C. despite the ephemeral reality of its flashing moment on the screen behind Beyoncé.

“NEVER ASK PERMISSION FOR SOMETHING THAT ALREADY BELONGS TO YOU.”

The concert was taking place as the United States deported eight men to South Sudan — a nation so dangerous that the Trump administration’s own State Department removed all non-essential personnel from the nation and warns American’s not to travel to the nation due to the dangerous conditions.

At a hearing earlier on the Fourth of July, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss — who had briefly blocked the administration from acting — acknowledged that the deportations could place the men in great danger. He did not get to the merits of their claim, however, because he decided he should transfer the case to another court that had been hearing related claims. That judge, U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, then denied the men’s request that evening because he decided he was bound by two prior Supreme Court orders — despite their lack of reasoning — blocking Murphy’s efforts to provide limited relief on those related claims.

By July 5, the Trump administration confirmed the men had been deported to South Sudan.

“Can we stand for something? Now is the time to face the wind.”

There was, in the midst of everything going on everywhere else, something so powerful about seeing someone like Beyoncé — one of the most successful Black stars in the world — standing in her own on the Fourth of July, demanding that she be treated as the singular figure she is in the face of and literal miles away from the leader of an administration that has repeatedly made clear its anti-Black, racist underpinnings.

With a stadium full of people who could hear her.

“NEVER ASK PERMISSION FOR SOMETHING THAT ALREADY BELONGS TO YOU.”

---

Fifth Circuit keeps Texas’s criminal immigration law on hold

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, on a 2-1 vote issued July 3, upheld the injunction blocking enforcement of S.B. 4, Texas’s criminal immigration law and sent it back to the district court for further proceedings about the scope of the injunction in light of Trump v. CASA, the decision about “universal injunctions.”

The long-pending case has had many twists and turns — including a trip up to the Supreme Court last year before the appeals court even heard arguments, as well as the U.S. dropping out of the case after the Trump administration began.

Notably, the opinion was from Judge Priscilla Richman, a George W. Bush appointee, who was skeptical of Texas’s arguments last year. She was joined by Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez, a Biden appointee.

Richman, at one point, noted plainly: “We do not write on a clean slate. There is nearly 150 years of Supreme Court precedent suggesting that the power to control the entry and removal of aliens is ‘vested solely in the Federal Government, rather than the States,’“ quoting from a 1976 Supreme Court opinion. “In light of this caselaw, Texas cannot step into the shoes of the national sovereign under our Constitution and federal laws.“

Judge Andy Oldham, a Trump appointee, wrote a vigorous dissent — as Fifth Circuit Trump appointees often do in the rare instance when they find themselves on the losing side of a vote — arguing that the majority “usurps the State of Texas’s sovereign right to police its border and to battle illegal immigration.”

---

Law Dork in the media

Law Dork subscribers were the first in the nation to know about the post-Supreme Court-order challenge to the effort to deport eight men to South Sudan. Although ultimately unsuccessful, it was important to see how district court judges continued to take their jobs very seriously (apparently more seriously than the Supreme Court) throughout the holiday.

Even the Associated Press credited my work on this issue —

— which was picked up by publications across the country, including ABC News, The Washington Post, The Detroit News, and The Las Vegas Sun.

---

Closing my tabs

This Sunday, these are the tabs I am closing: