Supreme Court lifts injunction, Trump wall resumes in Texas Big Bend

Homeland Security issues waivers to fast‑track Big Bend projects

Homeland Security secretaries Kristi Noem and Markwayne Mullin issued three waivers beginning in February 2026 to expedite projects in the Big Bend area, citing the region as an “area of high illegal entry”.

Plaintiffs argue that Noem and Mullin exceeded their authority by issuing the waivers, violating the “major questions” doctrine that requires clear congressional authorization for actions of vast economic and political significance.

On Monday the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a district‑court injunction, allowing the Trump administration to continue building a border wall and related infrastructure in West Texas’s Big Bend region.

A construction vehicle was photographed building the border wall near Sunland Park, New Mexico in 2026, illustrating the resumption of work following the court’s decision. The Supreme Court has previously used the major‑questions doctrine to block several of former President Joe Biden’s executive actions and, in February, to strike down former President Donald Trump’s global tariffs.

Environmental groups condemn the decision as “horrific”

They noted that Big Bend ranks last for apprehensions among the six border sectors, accounting for only 0.3% to 2.2% of total annual border‑wide apprehensions despite covering over 25% of the U.S.–Mexico border.

Project details: 30‑foot barrier, 500‑mile stretch, private‑land focus

The wall being built is a 30‑foot barrier, described as a cornerstone of President Donald Trump’s plan to tackle illegal immigration. Inside Big Bend National Park the administration will install a non‑contiguous 17‑mile vehicle barrier rather than the 30‑foot pedestrian fence used elsewhere, while most of the work in the sector will occur on privately owned land across a 500‑mile stretch of the border.

Litigation continues as lawsuits challenge waivers and environmental compliance

The Supreme Court granted the Trump administration’s emergency request to lift the federal judge’s injunction, allowing construction to resume while lawsuits continue. The injunction had been issued by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone in El Paso in October, halting the Big Bend project.

The stay lifted the preliminary injunction, but plaintiffs argue the waivers violate the major‑questions doctrine, the National Environmental Policy Act and lack congressional authorization, prompting further legal challenges. The lawsuit filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, a river guide and a historic‑preservation group remains active, contesting the waivers and environmental compliance. The litigation is expected to proceed as courts examine the validity of the waivers and the scope of the Supreme Court’s lift of the injunction.