A group of Texas landowners in the Big Bend region is taking legal action against the federal government to prevent the construction of a border wall. On Monday, six landowners, alongside the nonprofit organization Conserve Big Bend, filed a lawsuit in Washington D.C. against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). This action, representing more than 230 landowners, aims to stop the government’s plans to claim private land for wall construction.
At a press conference in Marfa, Texas, Clara Bensen, a board member of the nonprofit No Big Bend Wall, addressed the gathering. She emphasized the collective effort of hundreds to safeguard their constitutional rights and generational land. The lawsuit questions the legal basis for federal waivers granted by the DHS Secretary, which label the region as having high illegal entry, enabling expedited wall construction and bypassing various federal laws.
“Hundreds of us are standing together to defend our constitutional rights and our private property,” said Clara Bensen.
The lawsuit contends that the Big Bend sector, spanning 517 miles, accounts for less than 1.5% of total apprehensions along the southwest border over five years, challenging its designation as a high-entry area. Plaintiffs argue that this classification, under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), unlawfully bypasses environmental and other regulatory protections.
Yolanda Alvarado, a rancher affected by the proposed wall, described the uncertainty and lack of transparency the situation has created for landowners. The court now has 60 days to respond to the suit, while DHS and CBP have not yet provided comments.
The lawsuit forms part of a broader resistance against the “Smart Wall,” intended to include 30-foot steel structures and various technologies. Opposition comes from a diverse range of stakeholders, including sheriffs and river guides, who argue the wall will harm the desert landscape crucial to local tourism.
David Keller, another plaintiff, highlighted the gravity of the situation facing the Big Bend region, describing it as an unprecedented threat. The landowner movement, backed by No Big Bend Wall, has successfully delayed surveys and construction by refusing access agreements.
Preceding legal challenges against federal waivers have largely failed, but Bensen believes this case is distinct as it zeroes in on the specific characteristics of the Big Bend region. This lawsuit seeks to question the legality of the DHS’s authorization of wall construction given the area’s unique geographical and historical context.
Lico Miller, whose family ranch lies in the proposed barrier’s path, expressed concerns about the wall severing access to vital water resources from the Rio Grande. He remains hopeful that legal action might slow the project’s progress and possibly reinstate federal laws.
“It is not inevitable that they will get it done,” Miller emphasized.
As plans for the border wall have progressed, CBP has allocated over $7 billion for projects in the Big Bend Sector. Landowners like Miller are urged to remain unified, standing firm against what they see as a threat to Texas’s sovereignty and local livelihood.