Judge Halts Big Bend Border Wall Construction, Suspends Federal Waivers

EL PASO, Texas – A federal judge has ordered an immediate halt to border wall construction across much of the Big Bend region of West Texas, delivering a major victory to local activists, landowners, and environmental groups who have been fighting the project for months.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone granted a preliminary injunction Friday after hearing hours of testimony from plaintiffs challenging the project. The ruling stops border wall construction throughout the Big Bend Sector within one mile of the Rio Grande and inside state and national parks while the lawsuit moves forward.

The lawsuit was brought by the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Ruidosa Church, and Big Bend river guide and landowner Billy Miller. They argue the federal government improperly fast-tracked the project and ignored environmental and cultural concerns.

In her order, Cardone found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on at least one of their claims, faced the threat of irreparable harm without court intervention, and that the balance of equities favored granting the injunction.

The ruling comes at a critical moment. Border wall construction is already underway in neighboring Hudspeth County, and a previous court-ordered pause covering much of the Big Bend region expired September 30.

A central issue in the case is the federal government’s designation of the 517-mile Big Bend Sector as an area of “high illegal entry.” That classification allowed the Department of Homeland Security to issue waivers bypassing dozens of environmental and cultural resource protection laws in order to accelerate construction.

In a significant development, Judge Cardone also ruled that the federal waivers for the Big Bend Sector are suspended while the injunction remains in effect. Other legal challenges have contested the waivers, but none previously succeeded in putting them on hold.

Customs and Border Protection said it is working with the Department of Justice to determine its next steps and remains confident in its legal authority to secure the border while protecting the Big Bend landscape.

Opponents of the project celebrated the decision. Susan Hays, a leader in the No Big Bend Wall movement and candidate for Presidio County commissioner, called the ruling “absolutely amazing,” arguing the government lacked sufficient justification for issuing the waivers in the first place.

Supporters of the lawsuit point to Border Patrol statistics showing the Big Bend Sector historically experiences the lowest volume of illegal crossings along the Southwest border. Last fiscal year, the sector accounted for just 1.3% of all migrant apprehensions despite representing nearly 28.5% of the border’s total mileage.

Expert witnesses testified that the Big Bend region consistently ranks last among border sectors in both apprehensions and drug seizures. Environmental experts and former Big Bend National Park officials also warned of potential damage to sensitive landscapes and wildlife habitat.

The court additionally heard emotional testimony from area landowners facing the prospect of a 30-foot steel bollard wall separating their properties from the Rio Grande. Witnesses described the region’s wilderness as central to their livelihoods and quality of life.

Others testified about construction impacts already visible in the area, including excavation work, staging sites, temporary worker camps, and increased traffic. Hudspeth County rancher Bill Addington described the construction activity as resembling a “dystopian nightmare.”

If the Trump administration appeals the ruling, the case could ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court.