Legal‑outcome part (Abbott “will lose in a court of law”)

• In January 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court, on its emergency docket, temporarily sided with the Biden administration and allowed Border Patrol to cut Texas’ razor wire near Eagle Pass while litigation continued. (theguardian.com) This is the context in which Sacks spoke.
• However, on November 27, 2024, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2–1 opinion in Texas v. Department of Homeland Security, reversing the district court and granting Texas a limited preliminary injunction that bars federal agents from damaging, destroying or interfering with Texas’ concertina‑wire fence except in narrowly defined circumstances. The court found the district judge had erred on sovereign‑immunity grounds and accepted Texas’ showing of likely success and irreparable harm. (ktsa.com) This is a significant win for Texas on the razor‑wire question and directly undercuts the idea that Abbott clearly “loses in a court of law” on this issue.
• Separately, the 5th Circuit sitting en banc later allowed Texas’ 1,000‑foot floating buoy barrier in the Rio Grande to remain, overturning a prior injunction that had ordered the barrier removed—again a legal win for Abbott in a border‑barrier case against the federal government. (reuters.com)
• Texas has not won everything: for example, in July 2025 a divided 5th Circuit panel upheld an injunction blocking Texas’ SB4 migrant‑arrest law, siding with challengers and the Biden administration and emphasizing that immigration enforcement is a federal power. Texas has vowed to appeal, and the case could go to the Supreme Court. (reuters.com)
• Crucially, there is no final Supreme Court merits decision resolving the core razor‑wire or buoy disputes as of November 30, 2025, and key aspects of Abbott’s broader border agenda remain in active litigation. Given the mix of wins and losses and the ongoing nature of these cases, it is not yet possible to say that Abbott has “ultimately” lost in formal courts on the razor‑wire/border‑barrier front.

Because the long‑run legal outcome Sacks predicted has not been definitively resolved, this half of the prediction cannot yet be judged.

Public‑opinion part (Abbott “will win in the court of public opinion”)

• A national Rasmussen Reports survey conducted January 23–25, 2024—immediately after the Supreme Court’s emergency order—found that 69% of likely U.S. voters support Texas “erecting barriers at the border to prevent illegal immigrants from crossing,” with only 27% opposed. (rasmussenreports.com) This question was framed explicitly around Texas’ actions in the very dispute Sacks was discussing, and thus directly supports his claim that Abbott would win public opinion on this specific standoff.
• By contrast, an earlier PRRI/Brookings survey (summarized by Axios and others) found that a 52% majority of Americans opposed installing deterrents such as walls, razor wire and deadly buoy barriers in general, with 44% supporting them. (axios.com) So when the issue is framed broadly as “deadly border deterrents,” national opinion is more negative; when framed specifically as “Texas versus Biden on erecting barriers,” the Rasmussen data show strong national support for Texas.

Net assessment

• The public‑opinion portion of Sacks’ claim is supported by at least one national poll directly about the Texas–Biden razor‑wire dispute.
• But the legal‑outcome portion is still unsettled: Abbott has won important appellate rulings on razor wire and buoys, lost others (e.g., SB4) and faces ongoing litigation with no final Supreme Court merits decisions on the main barrier disputes.

Because a key part of the normalized prediction (“will ultimately lose in formal courts”) has not yet been definitively resolved, the overall prediction must be rated inconclusive rather than right or wrong at this time.