Right wing legal extremists have a cunning plan to “fix” the border Gregg Abbot hasn’t signed off on it yet but he’s ready: One of the more insidious elements of Texas’ attempt to annex immigration enforcement away from the federal government comes down to its justification. Proponents, like the author of the hard-line HB20, state Rep. Matt Schaefer (R), say that Texas faces an “invasion” from Mexico, specifying that drug cartels trafficking fentanyl constitute a threat to the state of Texas. It’s not only a way to inflate the sense of crisis and potentially set the stage for a sea change in national immigration policy; it could, far-right lawmakers theorize, allow the state to seize border enforcement powers from the federal government. During an invasion, the Constitution says, states have a right to defend themselves. Declaring an invasion under Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, far-right legal theorists argue, could allow state law enforcement to assume certain powers that have been, until now, the province of the federal government, including letting state law enforcement deport undocumented migrants to Mexico. That far-fetched legal reasoning has struggled in court when other states have attempted to make the argument in recent decades. But with an increasingly right-wing judiciary, Texas lawmakers and Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) have said that they believe they would face better odds. Gov. Greg Abbott (R) set the current bout of border fever in motion by launching Operation Lone Star, an effort that has encompassed a border blockade and…