Summary
The U.S. Supreme Court allowed President Donald Trump’s administration to proceed with plans for a border wall through Big Bend National Park by lifting a lower court injunction. The ruling said the government was likely to succeed in arguing that the lower court lacked jurisdiction; the lawsuit challenges agency waivers that bypass environmental and historic-preservation laws.Key Facts
- The Supreme Court granted the administration’s emergency request to lift the injunction blocking construction.
- U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone issued the injunction in October.
- Cardone cited data showing that the Big Bend sector accounts for 0.3 to 2.2 percent of migrant apprehensions, despite covering more than 25 percent of the U.S.-Mexico border.
- The Supreme Court said the government was likely to prevail on its argument that the 1996 immigration law limits the lower court’s jurisdiction.
- The law allows district courts to hear only claims alleging a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
- Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only justice who indicated she would have denied the government’s request.
- The plaintiffs include the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Ruidosa Church, and a local river guide and landowner.
- Big Bend National Park is home to endangered species, including the Mexican long-nosed bat.
Read the Full Article
This is a fact-based summary from The Actual News. Click below to read the complete story directly from the original source.
