In 2022, Texas Governor Greg Abbott joined a bipartisan group of governors in opposing a Biden administration initiative that aimed to transfer Air National Guard units from six states to the U.S. Space Force. This plan raised alarms about federal overreach and the potential erosion of state control over National Guard forces. Although Texas was not directly affected, Abbott expressed strong opposition in an open letter to the president, labeling the proposal an "intolerable threat" and a "dangerous precedent."

However, in 2023, Abbott supported a plan by then-President Donald Trump to deploy Texas National Guard members to Illinois and Oregon to assist federal law enforcement with immigration enforcement. This decision faced backlash from the governors of those states, who argued that it represented an unnecessary escalation and an infringement on state sovereignty.

Abbott defended the deployment on Fox News, asserting that the president has the authority to mobilize National Guard members to ensure public safety. He emphasized his close working relationship with Trump, stating that they were aligned on national security issues.

This shift in Abbott's position is notable, as he has historically championed state sovereignty. Constitutional experts have pointed out that his current actions may set a concerning precedent, potentially undermining the traditional powers of governors to manage law enforcement within their states. Critics argue that Abbott's support for federal actions could lead to a future where state rights are further compromised, particularly if a different administration were to take a more aggressive stance.

Abbott's recent actions include directing state agencies to assist with federal immigration enforcement and sharing voter registration data with the federal government, which some experts view as a form of state complicity in federal overreach. This has raised alarms about the implications for state governance and the potential for future federal interference in state matters.

The deployment of Texas National Guard troops has faced legal challenges, with federal judges temporarily halting the mobilization after Illinois and Oregon filed lawsuits claiming violations of the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not explicitly granted to the federal government for the states. The ongoing litigation highlights the tension between state and federal authority, particularly in the context of immigration enforcement and law enforcement management.

Abbott's cooperation with federal directives, particularly those from Trump, has drawn criticism from fellow governors and legal scholars, who argue that it undermines the foundational principles of federalism and state rights. As the legal battles continue, the implications of Abbott's actions for the future of state sovereignty remain uncertain.