Yielding to Trump, Supreme Court bulldozes barriers to Big Bend border wall

The Trump administration has rushed to erect a border wall across the pristine wilderness area despite having the lowest apprehension rates anywhere on the southern border.WASHINGTON (CN) — In a win for President Donald Trump, the Supreme Court on Monday lifted roadblocks preventing border wall construction in the Big Bend region of Texas.A Texas judge paused work on the project after the administration brushed aside required environmental reviews to quickly erect barriers over the remote area. But the Department of Homeland Security claimed that the border wall section was essential to protecting the nation’s borders, asking the justices to intervene.Big Bend’s harsh desert environment and rugged mountain ranges have doubled as a natural barrier to travel. The region includes national and state parks, ranchlands, and unique historic and cultural resources.The wilderness landscape remained largely unscathed until the Trump administration plowed through pristine habitats as part of a project to construct over 300 miles of barriers and roads throughout the roughly 500-mile Big Bend section.Under former Secretary Kristi Noem and current Secretary Markwayne Mullin, DHS has issued three waivers bypassing environmental reviews to expedite construction in the Big Bend area. Both agency heads relied on a 1996 statute allowing DHS to ignore legal requirements necessary to ensure the quick construction of border barriers in areas with high rates of illegal crossings.Despite its lower rate of illegal crossings, DHS determined the Big Bend sector qualified for the waivers. The agency said other law enforcement tools wouldn’t suffice to monitor the section because Big Bend’s landscape makes it hard to police.Ranchers, residents and environmentalists have strongly opposed the project, fearing it will disturb the remote terrain. Outrage over videos of bulldozers blasting through the area led the Trump administration to pause construction in Big Bend National Park this summer, but earlier this month, the government signaled its intent to resume work on the project.The Big Bend section records fewer crossings than any other portion of the Texas-Mexico border because of its remoteness. As such, a Texas judge determined that DHS likely exceeded its authority by waiving environmental reviews for the project.The government urged the Supreme Court to overturn the injunction, arguing that without adequate border security infrastructure, certain segments would become funnel points for illegal crossings and smuggling of contraband.“Leaving a 300-plus-mile gap in border defenses would act as a dangerous magnet for cartels and other bad actors to exploit as other routes close off,” the government wrote.Environmental advocates opposed the emergency appeal, arguing that if construction proceeds, the landscape will be forever altered. They said that the government’s border security operations in the sector remain supported by extensive and effective surveillance technology, patrols, sensors, drones and existing infrastructure.The government brushed aside the challengers’ “aesthetic and recreational” concerns about the project. But environmental advocates said that characterization ignored factual findings that the border wall construction would restrict individuals’ livelihoods, impact the natural ecosystem and threaten historic and cultural resources.“The affected landscape encompasses one of the largest remaining undeveloped regions along the southern border, including Big Bend National Park, Big Bend Ranch State Park, and the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River corridor,” environmental advocates wrote. “Witnesses testified and submitted written declarations attesting to the increasingly rare opportunities for solitude, spiritual reflection, recreation, education, and wildlife observation that this landscape provides. While [the government] accords little value to these interests, the district court correctly found otherwise.”Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads