jurisdiction over this suit, other forums remain open for examining the Executive Branch’s enforcement policies. For example, Congress possesses an array of tools to analyze and influence those policies [and] those are political checks for the political process . One such critical tool for Congress to influence the Executive Branch to comply with the immigration laws of the United States is impeachment. The dissenting Justice noted, The Court holds Texas lacks standing to challenge a federal policy that inflicts substantial harm on the State and its residents by releasing illegal aliens with criminal convictions for serious crimes. In order to reach this conclusion, the Court...holds that the only limit on the power of a President to disobey a law like the important provision at issue is Congress’ power to employ the weapons of inter-branch warfare... . As the dissenting Justice explained, Congress may wield what the Solicitor General described as political...tools —which presumably means such things as...impeachment and removal . Indeed, during oral argument, the Justice who authored the majority opinion stated to the Solicitor General, I think your position is, instead of judicial review, Congress has to resort to shutting down the government or impeachment or dramatic steps... . Here, in light of the inability of injured parties to seek judicial relief to remedy the refusal of Alejandro N. Mayorkas to comply with Federal immigration laws, impeachment is Congress’s only viable option. In all of this, Alejandro N. Mayorkas willfully and systemically refused to comply with the immigration laws, failed to control the border to the detriment of national security, compromised public safety, and violated the rule of law and separation of powers in the Constitution, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore Alejandro N. Mayorkas, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national and border security, the safety of the United States people, and the Constitution if