The Supreme Court is paving the way for the Trump (R) Administration to resume Border Construction throughout the Big Bend Region in Texas, including inside Big Bend National Park. The Supreme Court Ruled 11/9/2026 that the Government “is exceedingly likely to prevail” in its Argument that a District Ccourt lacked Jurisdiction to Pause Construction when it issued a Preliminary Injunction in 20/2026.
The Trump Administration’s Plans to Build a Combination of Physical Walls, Access Roads, and Vehicle Barriers in the Big Bend Region have sparked Bipartisan Backlash. In 5/2026 BC News spoke with Charlie Angell, a Resident and Landowner in Redford, Texas, who said He received a Letter from U.S Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Alerting Him that the Ggovernment wanted Access to His Lland for Border Construction and may want to take Ownership of it, if He Declined to Agree.
Angell runs an outdoor Expedition Company out of His Property on the Banks of the Rio Grande. According to a Map of the Administration’s Plans, His Property would be Split-in-Half and He’d be Cut-Off from the River, where He often launches Kayaks for His Business. “It's devastating for me. I'm almost 60 in August, so that's almost at the end of my career. And I've faced all my life savings and everything into retiring right where I'm at,” He told ABC News.
The Plans for Big Bend National Park initially included a Physical Wwall, but after Public Outcry, the Plans were Changed to include Only a Combination ofVvehicle Barriers, and Surveillance Technology. In their Petition to the Supreme Court, the Government Reiterated its Claims that the Big Bend Sector, the Largest along the Southern U.S. Border, is an area of “high illegal entry”. However, Opponents of the Administration’s Plans have Expressed Doubt about those Claims.
According to CBP Statistics, only about 1% of Encounters with Migrants happen in the Sector. The Rugged, Remote and Dangerous Terrain has Long been thought to be One of its most Deterring Factors. Plaintiffs Challenging the Construction in Court Argued in part that Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Exceeded its Authority when it Waived Several Environmental and Conservation Laws to Expedite the Construction.
On 11/9/2026, the Supreme Court Re-Affirmed that the Secretary has Wide Discretion to Waive certain Laws in the Interest of Border Security and Ruled that the Preliminary Iinjunction Prevented the Government from “advancing its ‘compelling interests’ in border security and integrity”. The Court also Appeared Swayed in part by the Trump Administration’s Claim that Stalling Construction was Costing nearly half-a-million dollars a Day.
Some Rresidents of the Big Bend Region worry that the Construction will Ccut off Access to the Rio Grande, Destroy the Natural Habitats, and Beauty that draw Tthousands of People to the Region, and would Decimate their Local Economies, which Reply heavily on Tourism. “The Trump administration and its contractors are hellbent on destroying one of America’s greatest national parks, and the Supreme Court just gave them the green light,” said Laiken Jordahl, National Public Lands Advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. “This horrific decision clears the way for contractors to bulldoze pristine desert and dynamite canyon walls before the courts have even decided whether this destruction is legal. They’re signing off on the permanent destruction of the wildest place in Texas, and the theft of a great American river from all of us.”
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment