Supreme Court Allows Texas Border Wall Work to Continue in Big Bend
Justices paused a lower court order that had halted construction, clearing the path for the administration to proceed with barriers in the region.
By Aiko Petrov ·
The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the Trump administration may resume border wall construction in the Big Bend region of Texas. The decision paused a lower court order that had previously stopped all work in the area. This move benefits a project that has faced legal challenges from environmental groups and local officials.
The wall is a central part of President Donald Trump's campaign promise to build a barrier from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico. Congress approved $46 billion for the project last summer. Customs and Border Protection is currently building 12 miles of barriers per week along the border. The agency is using waivers to bypass environmental regulations that usually slow down major construction projects.
In the Big Bend area, the proposed barriers include 30-foot-tall steel walls, vehicle barriers, and new roads. Opponents argue the project is an expensive solution for an area with historically low rates of illegal immigration. They suggest that surveillance technology, such as drones, would be a more effective use of resources. The area includes Big Bend National Park and surrounding state and private lands.
A Texas judge had sided with the opposition earlier, ruling that Congress likely did not authorize such broad waivers for a section of the border with the lowest migrant apprehension rates. The judge ordered an immediate halt to construction. The administration appealed, arguing that illegal crossings and drug seizures still occur in Big Bend and that traffic might shift there if a gap remains in the wall.
The Supreme Court majority found that the law limits judges' power to intervene when the federal government deems rapid barrier construction necessary. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a dissenting opinion. The Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Ruidosa Church, and a local river guide filed the original lawsuit. Laiken Jordahl, a public lands advocate for the Center, said the government had never before waived so many environmental laws inside a national park.
Jordahl called the ruling a horrific decision that allows contractors to destroy the landscape before the courts fully decide on its legality. She described the action as the permanent destruction of the wildest place in Texas and the theft of a major river. Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, an opponent of the project, published an opinion piece in the San Antonio Express-News on Monday arguing against the construction.
The case will continue to play out in the courts. The administration can proceed with construction in the Big Bend region while the legal dispute remains active. No further dates have been set for the next legal proceedings in this specific case.
