A federal court in Texas issued a temporary injunction on Friday, halting the Trump administration’s plans to construct border walls and related infrastructure across the state’s Big Bend region. The ruling represents a significant victory for a coalition of landowners, business owners, and environmentalists who have long opposed the project.
The construction effort is part of a $46 billion initiative by the Trump administration to fortify the southern border with a combination of 30-foot steel walls, vehicle barriers, roads, and surveillance technology. The judge’s order covers Big Bend National Park and extends throughout the approximately 500-mile Big Bend sector, which constitutes roughly a quarter of the 2,000-mile southern border with Mexico.
U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone determined that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on at least one of their claims. She noted that without the injunction, the groups would suffer serious and irreparable harm, and that the balance of equities and public interest favored the opponents of the project.
Opponents argued that the rugged, remote terrain of Big Bend already serves as a natural barrier to illegal immigration, rendering the construction unnecessary. Furthermore, they contended that the Department of Homeland Security violated the law by issuing broad waivers to bypass environmental, cultural, and archaeological protections in an effort to expedite construction.
The lawsuit was filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, alongside advocates for a historic church in Ruidosa and a local river guide. Laiken Jordahl of the Center for Biological Diversity called the ruling a “total victory,” stating that construction equipment would be removed until the court makes a final decision on the merits.
The decision follows weeks of bipartisan opposition, particularly after bulldozers were seen clearing land within Big Bend National Park in August. While Customs and Border Protection paused operations in the park, that pause expired on September 30. The administration has stated it is reconsidering its plans for the national park but has not yet finalized its approach.
Tiernan Sittenfeld, president and CEO of the National Parks Conservation Association, expressed satisfaction with the ruling but urged the administration to repair damage already caused and engage with local communities to develop alternative solutions. “Big Bend is no place for border barriers,” Sittenfeld said.
Customs and Border Protection and the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In areas outside the national park, the government has sought permission from private landowners for surveys and construction, though officials indicated in recent filings that they may refer cases involving uncooperative landowners to the Justice Department.
I guess nature wins again. You really can’t build a wall in a national park without consequences.
Good to see a judge standing up to executive overreach. Hope this injunction holds through the appeal.
What happens to the landowners who refused entry? The article mentions they might face the Justice Department.
Big Bend’s rugged terrain already acts as a natural barrier. Why spend billions on something unnecessary?
Does this mean the rest of the wall project is stalled too? Seems like a major legal setback for the administration.
Finally, a win for environmental protections and the rule of law. The court had no choice here.