RUIDOSA, Texas – The Trump administration is determined to push forward with a massive $46 billion project to build a border wall that stretches from the Pacific Ocean all the way to the Gulf of Mexico. However, in the Big Bend area of Texas, the plan is facing strong resistance from local landowners who don’t want to give up their land for what they believe is an unnecessary use of taxpayer money.
This pushback is complicating President Trump’s signature infrastructure initiative and raises questions about how far the government will go to achieve its vision of a fortified southern border. Despite low illegal crossings in the region and significant natural barriers, the administration is committed to using billions of dollars and bypassing environmental regulations to continue the project.
Though the federal government has the authority to proceed with the construction, a recent judge’s ruling has temporarily halted work in the area. This decision provides a significant boost to landowners who are fighting back by refusing to allow government surveyors on their property, attending county meetings to voice their concerns, and preparing for legal battles.
“Landowner resistance has slowed this project to a crawl,” stated David Keller, a landowner involved in a lawsuit against the border wall. He believes the administration was not ready for the backlash it provoked.
Building a wall has been a key promise for Trump since he began his campaign. Last year, Congress approved $46 billion for the wall as part of a broader immigration enforcement strategy. Even with illegal crossings decreasing under Trump’s policies, the administration insists that barriers and surveillance are necessary to maintain control.
According to Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the administration is constructing about 12 miles of barriers each week, having completed over 200 miles of new walls since Trump took office. In the Big Bend area, construction began in September with plans to spend $7.5 billion on a wall extending over 500 miles.
In August, CBP reported 8,870 arrests along the southern border, with only 161 occurring in the Big Bend region, which constitutes a quarter of the entire border.
Landowners are preparing for court battles to resist the wall. Much of the land in Texas is privately owned, meaning the government must obtain permission to survey and build. If landowners refuse, the government can resort to eminent domain, a legal process that allows them to take private property for public use, although compensation is typically offered.
Dianna and Dan Burbach, long-time residents of the area, received a request to survey their property for the wall. They are concerned that the construction could lead to flooding and cut off part of their land from the rest. “We’re going to let them take us to court,” Dianna said, determined to fight back.
While some landowners have reached agreements with CBP, others are preparing for legal disputes. The No Big Bend Wall Coalition has sued to prevent construction, arguing that the government is misusing its authority in an area with minimal illegal border activity.
In a recent victory for opponents, a federal judge temporarily barred construction in the Big Bend area, with plaintiffs claiming the administration overstepped its authority by waiving important regulations. Keller celebrated the ruling as “unqualified good news,” but landowners remain wary about the future of their fight.
The administration has filed an appeal against the judge’s decision, arguing that leaving parts of the border unsecured could lead to increased illegal immigration in those areas.
Local resistance is growing, with contractors facing protests and local officials being pressured not to assist with the project. Charlie Angell, a tourism operator, and his partner Bibiana Gutierrez have been vocal at county meetings, participating in demonstrations, and monitoring contractor activities.
Despite some local officials advocating for the project due to financial incentives, many landowners believe that their collective opposition holds weight. “If we had rolled over, the wall would be up,” Gutierrez stated.
While Trump’s tough border policies have appealed to many, even some Republicans now question the necessity of a wall in the Big Bend region. Local law enforcement and ranchers emphasize that technology and natural barriers may be more effective than a physical wall.
The rugged terrain of Big Bend, with steep cliffs and desert landscapes, poses challenges for anyone attempting to cross from Mexico. Residents argue that the area’s natural features already serve as a deterrent against illegal crossings.
For many landowners, the struggle against the border wall is about more than just property rights; it represents a test of how much power the federal government wields over individual citizens. “If we’re going to be run over and have our land taken by our own government, what makes anybody else think that they’re exempt?” Allen asked, highlighting the broader implications of this fight.
As the legal battles continue and public opposition grows, the future of the border wall in Big Bend remains uncertain. Many landowners are determined to fight for their rights and protect their land, feeling the weight of their family legacies as they do so.
Associated Press writer Alanna Durkin Richer contributed from Washington.
