Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.
This week, there has been growing frustration among Democrats, environmentalists, and migrant advocates due to President Joe Biden’s administration persisting with its intention to construct portions of a border wall along certain areas of the Texas-Mexico border.
In a recent statement, Biden acknowledges that he is compelled to proceed with the construction of the wall. Furthermore, his administration has officially filed a notice, effective as of Thursday, expressing its intention to bypass 26 laws and regulations. This is done in order to swiftly proceed with the construction of a limited stretch of new barrier in Starr County.
Opponents of the wall were outraged by this, pointing out that Biden had campaigned against the border wall during his 2020 run.
Laiken Jordahl, a southwest conservation advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity, expressed deep disappointment and shock at witnessing this administration taking a horrifying step backwards that was completely unexpected.
But border barrier construction has continued in Texas and elsewhere since the early days of Biden’s term. As early as 2021, construction crews were erecting 15-foot concrete panels topped with 6-foot steel bollards in the Rio Grande Valley. In 2022, U.S. Customs and Border Protection detailed plans to build 86 miles of border wall in the Rio Grande Valley, including Starr County.
On Thursday, Biden told reporters that he was required by law to continue certain wall construction because Congress appropriated money for it. That appropriation occurred in 2019, before Biden took office.
“He said that he attempted to persuade them to reallocate the funds, to channel that money elsewhere. However, they refused to do so. At present, there are no legal provisions that allow me to intervene, apart from ensuring that the money is used for its intended purpose. I am unable to prevent that.”
When questioned about his opinion on the effectiveness of the border wall, he responded negatively, stating, “No.”
In contrast to the public filing by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas on Thursday, where he emphasized the pressing and immediate requirement for constructing physical barriers and roads along the US border to prevent unauthorized entry into the project areas, the previous statement contradicts his stance.
Mayorkas stated that the department would waive laws such as the Clean Air Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act.
Mayorkas emphasized in a statement sent later on Thursday that the Biden administration’s stance on border barriers remains unchanged, clarifying that the notice bearing his name was misinterpreted.
Mayorkas emphasized that the current Administration holds the view that an efficient border security system necessitates a more intelligent and extensive strategy, encompassing cutting-edge border surveillance technology and upgraded ports of entry. He stressed the requirement for Congress to allocate the necessary funds to effectively deploy these well-established methods.
Nevertheless, Texas Democrats in Congress strongly condemned the actions taken this week.
U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-El Paso, urged the White House to reconsider its decision to proceed with the wall, “especially the disastrous choice to waive environmental laws.” U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, meanwhile, called a border wall “a 14th century solution to a 21st century problem.”
He stated, “I persist in opposing the squandering of taxpayer funds on an inefficient border wall, and I will persist in advocating for solutions that truly benefit our dedicated personnel on the front line. These solutions include increased border technology and personnel at both ports of entry and areas between them.”
Meanwhile, Republicans have pushed for more border barriers to be built, with Gov. Greg Abbott directing Texas agencies to take steps to build walls with state resources.
Still, U.S. Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Houston, said the Biden administration’s actions this week were nothing to celebrate. He said buoys in the Rio Grande, similar to those Abbott deployed in a small stretch of the river in Eagle Pass, are necessary too.
“If Biden is serious, that’s what’s needed,” Crenshaw wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “Can be deployed immediately and they actually prevent migrants from crossing the international barrier. But he’s not serious. It’s a stunt to grab some headlines and make it seem like he’s not totally ignoring the crisis he created.”
Maps included in a proposal by U.S. Customs and Border Protection appear to indicate that the wall would cut through tracts of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Wildlife Refuge, a wildlife corridor that attempts to connect undisrupted habitat along the last 275 miles of the Rio Grande.
According to Jordahl, a representative from the Center for Biological Diversity, the ruling came as a surprise and was deeply discouraging.
“It doesn’t matter if you label it as a wall, a fence, or a barrier,” Jordahl explained. “Wildlife remains unaffected as they simply cannot penetrate it.”
Environmental advocates have issued a warning, expressing concerns that the border barrier may cause disruption to a delicate ecosystem in the region. Specifically, they worry about the potential harm inflicted upon two endangered plant species, namely the Zapata bladderpod and prostrate milkweed. The center also highlights the adverse effects on the recovery plans for endangered ocelots, as a significant portion of their natural habitat in the Rio Grande Valley has already been lost to urbanization.
Jordahl stated that the border barrier would jeopardize the refuge’s efforts to establish a contiguous habitat along the border, enabling wildlife to access the river.
Jordahl stated that this small wildlife refuge, consisting of these stretches, is undoubtedly the most exceptional wildlife habitat left in the entire county. However, the border wall would ruthlessly cut through it, obstructing our ability to accomplish the refuge system’s goal.
Jordahl emphasized that while the funds allocated for the border must be utilized by the Biden administration, there is no requirement to disregard the crucial environmental laws.
Alan Lizarraga, communications coordinator of the Border Network for Human Rights, expressed disappointment as he witnessed Biden’s decision to uphold Trump’s policies.
Lizarraga expressed her opinion, stating that the strategy employed is unsuccessful. She emphasized that the repeated use of wall construction and deterrence policies does not effectively address the underlying causes of immigration. These measures fail to tackle the reasons behind why people choose to migrate.
According to Naida Alvarez, a resident of Rosita community located south of Eagle Pass, the construction of the wall will significantly disturb her daily life. She expressed concerns about the wall being built on her own land, right behind her house.
She expressed, “In our locality, there exist numerous streams. However, if a wall is constructed, it will result in the sinking of all the earth. The stability of the land will be compromised, leading to the potential sinking of houses.”
Currently, she has the opportunity to engage in fishing near her residence and witness the graceful movement of various untamed creatures such as foxes, wild boars, and rabbits.
“Remember when Biden claimed to be a man of his word during his campaign?” she exclaimed. “Well, it seems like he’s going back on his promises and adopting the same foolish policies as the previous president.”
Uriel J. García and Matthew Watkins contributed reporting.
