The Biden administration has taken steps to expedite the construction of a new wall along the southern border in Texas, signaling a stark departure from its previous stance on the contentious issue. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced the plan to waive over a dozen federal laws, bypassing lengthy environmental reviews, in a bid to hasten the construction of the border wall in Starr County, TX. This move comes as the administration grapples with an ongoing migrant crisis that has strained both local and federal resources.
The chosen construction site, identified as having “high illegal entry” by authorities, has prompted the DHS Secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, to emphasize an “acute and immediate need” for physical barriers and roads to prevent unlawful entries. This decision seems to mirror the approach of the Trump administration, known for its robust border wall initiative that saw the erection of approximately 450 miles of barriers between 2017 and January 2021.
The decision by the Democratic administration is a notable contradiction to President Biden’s earlier commitment to cease border wall construction. In a proclamation on January 20, 2021, Biden declared, “Building a massive wall that spans the entire southern border is not a serious policy solution.” However, the current move by the DHS, planning to add up to 20 miles of barriers in the Rio Grande Valley, seems to circumvent this promise.
Biden vowed to never build a border wall, but now he has reversed course.
KJP said border walls were “ineffective” due to “heavy winds.”
Did the winds change?
Or just the political winds?
via @OutnumberedFNC ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/33NFPvhyrL
— Kayleigh McEnany (@kayleighmcenany) October 5, 2023
US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) defended the planned construction, asserting that it aligns with the appropriation of fiscal year 2019 funds designated for border barrier construction in the Rio Grande Valley. The assertion is that the DHS is obligated to utilize these funds for their intended purpose.
The waiver of significant environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and Endangered Species Act, has raised concerns among environmental advocates. Laiken Jordahl, a southwest conservation advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity, expressed worry about the impact on wildlife habitats, stating that the wall “will stop wildlife migrations dead in their tracks” and result in the destruction of a substantial amount of wildlife refuge land.
In response, Representative Henry Cuellar criticized the decision, calling a border wall a “14th-century solution to a 21st-century problem” and asserting that it will not enhance border security in Starr County. Cuellar emphasized his opposition to what he considers wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars on an ineffective border wall. The contentious nature of this issue persists, as the Biden administration navigates the complexities of immigration and border security.
