"U.S. Supreme Court precedent for laws similar to Texas' law are firmly on our side," Abbott said. "This decision will be appealed immediately and I am confident Texas' law will be found constitutional and ultimately be upheld."

Attorney General Ken Paxton almost immediately filed an appeal to the district court. He also asked to have the lawsuits against Senate Bill 4 consolidated and moved from Garcia's court in San Antonio to Austin, "where the people's representatives passed SB 4," he said in a written statement. "State business is conducted in Austin. The plaintiffs have no reason to litigate this case in San Antonio."

On Sept. 5, Paxton filed a motion to stay the lower court's ruling with the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. He asked the appeals court to issue a ruling within two days.

"The district court's fundamentally flawed holding that states violate the Fourth Amendment by even voluntarily honoring federal ICE detainer requests threatens to shut down federal-local cooperation that has existed throughout the nation since the 1940s," Paxton said in his motion. "The district court's order should be immediately stayed pending appeal, as this injunction has far reaching public safety consequences. Senate Bill 4 is wholly valid, and the state has every right to prohibit its own localities from having sanctuary city policies."

Rep. Matt Krause, R-Fort Worth, said he was not surprised by the ruling but was confident the law would be upheld by the Supreme Court.

"They can find a judge to invalidate what they want to," Krause said. "The product we approved was constitutionally sound and was based on precedent. It's a good law and I'm confident it will be upheld."

Rep. Matt Shaheen, R-Plano, said Texas would ultimately prevail.

"For a federal judge to interfere with Texas law requiring our law enforcement to honor detainers approaches legal malpractice and endangers our citizens," Shaheen said.

The plaintiffs in the case — which include the state’s largest cities, as well as several counties and civil rights organizations — celebrated Garcia’s ruling. They had argued that the sanctuary cities ban violated the Constitution and would cause them irreparable harm if it were allowed to go into effect.

"It's a win for the country," Roger Rocha, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, one of the lead plaintiffs in the case, said in a written statement. "The ruling protects the civil liberties of immigrant communities across the U.S. that live in fear of discrimination due to the color of their skin, accent, and native country. We prevailed in blocking state lawmakers from rolling back decades of progress our nation has made on civil rights."