\n<\/p>\n
RUIDOSA, Texas — <\/span>The message from the Trump administration has been clear: It is moving ahead with a $46 billion border wall<\/a> project stretching from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico.<\/p>\n But in Texas\u2019 Big Bend region, the administration has run up against intense opposition from landowners<\/a>, many of whom are unwilling to cede parts of their property for what they see as a waste of taxpayer dollars.<\/p>\n That resistance is complicating President Donald Trump\u2019s signature infrastructure project in a fight that has become a test of just how far the administration will go to fulfill its vision of a fortified southern border.<\/p>\n The administration has committed billions of dollars and waived environmental and other protections to plow ahead with the project despite the region\u2019s historically low illegal crossings, its formidable natural barriers and a surge of bipartisan opposition that has scrambled traditional border politics. <\/p>\n The federal government has sweeping authority to force the project through. But a judge has now paused construction<\/a> across the region, giving a major boost to landowners who have sought to impede the wall by refusing to cooperate with government surveyors, protesting at county meetings and gearing up for court battles.<\/p>\n \u201cLandowner resistance has slowed this project to a crawl,\u201d said David Keller, a landowner suing to stop the Big Bend border plans. The administration, he added, was \u201cwoefully unprepared for the hornet\u2019s nest they stirred up.\u201d<\/p>\n Building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border has long been a key campaign promise for Trump. And the administration pushed ahead with it after Republicans last year approved $46 billion for the border wall<\/a> as part of a sweeping immigration enforcement package.<\/p>\n Although illegal crossings have plummeted under Trump, the administration says walls, vehicle barriers, surveillance technology and patrol roads are needed to keep them low.<\/p>\n Customs and Border Protection says it\u2019s building an average of about 12 miles or 20 kilometers of barrier a week and had recently hit a milestone of more than 200 miles (320 km) of new walls built under the second Trump administration.<\/p>\n In Big Bend, where construction began in September<\/a>, the administration plans to spend $7.5 billion to fortify the border along a region stretching more than 500 miles (800 km).<\/p>\n In August, the Border Patrol arrested 8,870 people along the southern border. In Big Bend, which makes up roughly one quarter of the entire U.S.-Mexico border, it arrested 161.<\/p>\n \u201cThe American people have already seen the consequences of an unprotected border,” said CBP Commissioner Rodney Scott after a lawsuit filed by landowners against the Big Bend project. \u201cWe cannot allow any region \u2014 including Big Bend \u2014 to be exploited again.\u201d<\/p>\n Unlike in other border areas, much of the land in Texas is privately or state owned. <\/p>\n The government must acquire authorization from owners to survey and build and if they refuse, can take them to court. The process by which the government takes someone\u2019s property for public use in exchange for compensation is known as eminent domain and courts generally defer to the government in these cases.<\/p>\n That hasn’t stopped Dianna and Dan Burbach.<\/p>\n The Burbachs began receiving paperwork in July seeking permission to survey their property, along with a map showing where the project would run behind their house. An August letter said the government had an \u201cimmediate need\u201d to enter and warned that it could go to court within 90 days.<\/p>\n Dianna, 63, and her husband, 79, arrived 25 years ago and raised four children in their orange adobe house on property stretching to the Rio Grande. Now retired, they worry construction could worsen flooding and leave 15 acres (6 hectares) of their land behind the wall.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re going to let them take us to court, do eminent domain,” Dianna said. “We\u2019ll fight it that way.\u201d <\/p>\n A Justice Department official said CBP has reached agreements with dozens of Big Bend landowners but that the administration has hired eminent domain attorneys in Texas in anticipation of the disputes. Across the southern border, about 70 such cases have been referred to the department during Trump\u2019s second term, and 50 have already been resolved \u2014 none required going to trial, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity under ground rules set by the government.<\/p>\n The No Big Bend Wall Coalition, which says its network includes more than 200 landowners, recently sued<\/a> to block construction. The plaintiffs argue that Homeland Security is misusing its authority in a region with little illegal cross-border activity. <\/p>\n Lawsuits aiming to stop or slow the border wall projects have largely been unsuccessful. But in a major win for opponents, a federal judge temporarily barred wall construction in the Big Bend area. Plaintiffs argued the administration had overstepped its congressional authority by issuing sweeping waivers to bypass environmental and other regulations.<\/p>\n Keller said the judge\u2019s ruling was \u201cunqualified good news\u201d but uncertainty over its future meant the landowners would continue their fight. <\/p>\n It\u2019s not immediately clear how long the judge\u2019s order will slow the government, which late Thursday asked the judge to put aside her order while they appeal.<\/p>\n The administration also argued in the court filing that leaving segments along the border without adequate border security infrastructure could lead to a funnel effect where illegal immigration or smuggling would flow to the area that was least fortified \u2014 specifically the Big Bend region. <\/p>\n Other opponents are pressing local governments not to assist contractors. Charlie Angell, a tourism operator notified that the government wanted access to his land for the border project, and his partner, Bibiana Gutierrez, attend county meetings throughout the region.<\/p>\n They and other land and business owners have staged protests, patrolled areas where contractors are working to look for possible violations, and hung signs telling contractors they\u2019re not welcome at local hotels or restaurants.<\/p>\n In Terrell County, residents unsuccessfully urged officials not to lease airport land to a barrier contractor. In Jeff Davis County, a proposed agreement allowing another contractor to use a county road has so far not been approved.<\/p>\n The financial incentives for some of these cash-starved counties are clear and some local officials have argued they have little leverage on a federal plan. <\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re not in control of the border wall. We\u2019re not,\u201d Terrell County Judge Dale Lynn Carruthers told a room crowded with people who had come to speak out against the airport lease. She said if they didn’t lease the land, the contractor would just buy it elsewhere. \u201cWe\u2019re just a little old Terrell County.\u201d<\/p>\n But Angell and Gutierrez argue that the local opposition has more strength than some might realize. <\/p>\n \u201cIf we had rolled over, the wall would be up,\u201d Gutierrez said.<\/p>\n CBP said it continues seeking voluntary access agreements while completing the project\u2019s design but will refer disputes to the Justice Department when necessary. Landowners will be compensated regardless of how access is obtained, the agency said.<\/p>\n After a yearslong surge in crossings<\/a> at the southern frontier, border security and immigration were key reasons Republicans voted for Trump and his approval ratings on those issues are among his strongest.<\/p>\n But with illegal crossings plummeting<\/a>, even some Republicans who voted for Trump on the issue of border security have questioned the need for the multi-billion dollar infrastructure through Big Bend. <\/p>\n