Supreme Court lifts injunction, permitting border barrier construction in Big Bend National Park

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court issued an unsigned opinion that lifted a lower‑court injunction and allowed the federal government to continue building a border barrier through a remote portion of Big Bend National Park in West Texas. The Court said the government was “exceedingly likely to prevail” on the argument that the district court lacked jurisdiction under the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which limits district‑court review to constitutional claims.

The injunction, originally imposed by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone in October, had stopped construction while lawsuits challenged the waivers used to bypass environmental regulations. Cardone noted that the Big Bend sector accounts for a small share of migrant apprehensions despite covering more than a quarter of the U.S.–Mexico border. The Supreme Court’s decision effectively dismissed those jurisdictional arguments and allowed the project to move forward.

Opposition to the wall has come from conservation groups, local officials, and some members of the Republican Party. Critics cite potential impacts on endangered species such as the Mexican long‑nosed bat, cultural sites, and the park’s tourism‑driven economy. In August, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Rodney Scott announced a temporary pause to assess the situation on the ground, stating a commitment to both border security and protection of the national park.

Supporters of the project argue that the barrier is essential for preventing illegal crossings and drug trafficking in an area they describe as a “high illegal entry” corridor. The Supreme Court’s opinion referenced congressional intent for “expeditious border construction,” concluding that it outweighs the alleged aesthetic, recreational, and environmental harms identified by opponents.