Holding of case
On December 16, 2024, the 13th Court of Appeals in Corpus Christi found Texas’ Human Smuggling statute to be unconstitutional as applied in the case of Gutierrez v. State of Texas.
Facts of case
The Gutierrez case stemmed from a case involving a U.S. citizen, Anna Gutierrez, who was driving a car with three passengers late at night on February 4, 2023, near Brackettville, Texas. Anna was pulled over for speeding and during the encounter, the peace officer determined that her passengers were undocumented because they were only able to provide Mexican identification cards. As a result, border patrol was called to pick up the passengers and Anna was arrested for felony human smuggling under Section 20.05 of the Texas Penal Code, which criminalizes a person who uses a motor vehicle to transport an individual with the intent to conceal that person from a peace officer. During her trial, there was testimony that Anna was arrested only “after it was confirmed that the three occupants were in the United States illegally.” Although proving the immigration status of passengers is not necessary to convict someone of human smuggling in Texas, Anna was found guilty by a jury after a trial that relied on evidence of the passengers’ immigration status to establish her intent to conceal.
Legal issues in case
The key issue in the Gutierrez case was whether the Texas human smuggling law is “preempted” (or overruled) by federal law in her case because only the federal government has the authority to enforce immigration laws.
Decision of case
The appellate court agreed with the Texas Rio Grande Public Defender’s office legal challenge that the Texas Human Smuggling statute under Section 20.05 of the Texas Penal Code was unconstitutionally preempted by federal law as applied to Anna Gutierrez’s case because smuggling is already covered by federal law. In simpler terms, the court said that Texas can’t use its state smuggling law to charge people if the case is based mostly (or only) on the claim that the passengers are non-citizens. That’s because federal immigration law already covers that, and states aren’t allowed to create or enforce their own separate immigration rules.
Impact of case in Texas
This decision limits Texas’ ability to use its smuggling law as part of Operation Lone Star, especially in cases where the only “evidence” of smuggling is that someone was transporting non-citizens. Prosecutors in Texas will now have a higher burden to show that arrests under TPC § 20.05(a)(1)(A) [human smuggling] are constitutional and not simply because someone is transporting undocumented individuals. As a result, this decision places limits on the scope of Operation Lone Star’s enforcement actions and offers a new avenue for defense attorneys to challenge smuggling prosecutions in Texas. Moving forward, this case will likely serve as a key precedent in the broader debate over federal-state conflicts in immigration enforcement.
Kristin Etter, Director of Policy & Legal Services
