Contrary to prior assurances, the Biden Administration’s decision to extend the U.S.-Mexico border wall has ignited controversy and sparked backlash from various quarters. This move, aimed at addressing the surging migration crisis, bypasses multiple federal laws, including environmental regulations. Despite President Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign promise not to add to the contentious border wall, the Biden Administration has expedited construction in South Texas near the Rio Grande River. This article delves into the reasons behind this decision, its implications, and the criticisms it has garnered.
Biden to build new border wall, touted by Trump, in policy reversal
Biden Administration: Revisiting the Border Wall Controversy
President Joe Biden had vowed during his 2020 presidential campaign not to build “another foot” of the border wall championed by his predecessor, Donald Trump. This wall became emblematic of Trump’s approach to curbing illegal immigration.
However, amid a resurgence in migration, particularly along the Texas-Mexico border, the Biden Administration has chosen to extend the border wall. This decision involves bypassing 26 federal laws, including environmental restrictions, to construct a new barrier section.
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas
The rationale provided by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is based on “high illegal entry” into the United States. Mayorkas argued, “There is presently an acute and immediate need to construct physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the border of the United States to prevent unlawful entries into the United States.”
Funding and Congressional Approval
The additional barriers and associated road infrastructure in Starr County, Texas, will be financed using funds approved by Congress in 2019 during the Trump presidency. This funding allocation has raised questions about whether the Biden Administration could have redirected or canceled it, considering the campaign promise to cease border wall expansion.
A gap in the border wall in Alamo, Texas. Construction of the wall was suspended this year when President Biden took office.
In response to queries regarding this decision, President Biden explained that Congress had not agreed to cancel the previously allocated funding, leaving him limited options. He emphasized his efforts to redirect the funds, which ultimately proved unsuccessful.
Contrasting Views on Border Wall Effectiveness
During his announcement, President Biden expressed his belief that a border wall is an impractical answer to immigration issues. This viewpoint contradicts Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas’s justification for the project, which cited the pressing need to prevent unlawful entries.
International Criticism
Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador
The decision to extend the border wall has sparked domestic controversy and drawn international criticism. Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador voiced his disapproval, characterizing the wall expansion as regarded as regressive, as it doesn’t tackle the underlying causes of migration. López Obrador’s critique emerged as he prepared to meet with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken in Mexico City.
Legal Obligations and Consequences
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre underscored that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is bound by law to utilize the allocated funding for the border wall, as intended by Congress. Jean-Pierre emphasized the Biden Administration’s commitment to legal compliance in this project.
REPORTER: "If the border wall is ineffective, why is the DHS secretary saying that it's 'necessary' to prevent unlawful entries into the United States?"
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) October 5, 2023
KARINE JEAN-PIERRE: "I have not seen that"
REPORTER: "It's in the notice that went out" pic.twitter.com/4yVS4MYsyc
This decision came when the U.S. witnessed a surge in migrant crossings along the Texas-Mexico border. Simultaneously, the U.S. Justice Department is engaged in legal battles with Texas Governor Greg Abbott over initiatives to deter illegal immigration.
Mixed Reactions and Political Implications
Democratic activist and South Texas attorney Ricardo de Anda, known for his legal battles against the attempts by the Trump Administration to secure privately-owned land for the border wall, described the Biden Administration’s wall expansion as “a slap in the face.” This sentiment reflects the disillusionment of some Biden supporters who expected a different approach to border security.
Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump seized the opportunity to criticize President Biden for delaying taking action and allowing what he described as a flood of “15 million illegal immigrants” into the country.
Deportation Flights and Migration Policies
In addition to the border wall extension, the Biden Administration announced the resumption of deportation flights for Venezuelans who entered the U.S. illegally. This decision follows an agreement with the Venezuelan government to accept nationals who fled their country.
Resuming deportation flights is part of the broader immigration policy framework. Officials noted that approximately 66,000 Venezuelan migrants have legally entered the U.S. since the announcement of this new policy. Venezuela has faced a protracted political, economic, and humanitarian crisis, prompting millions to migrate, often through perilous routes.
Texas’s Stance and Legal Battles
Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a vocal critic of the Biden Administration’s immigration approach, has received significant support from the state legislature. Nearly $10 billion has been allocated to Abbott’s Operation Lone Star, dispatching numerous National Guard troops and officers from the Texas Department of Public Safety to Southern Texas.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott
Texas has also taken steps to enhance border security, including installing miles of razor wire and constructing barriers on private land with the consent of landowners. Legal disputes related to these measures have further intensified the immigration debate.
Legal Proceedings and Future Developments
Recently, Texas faced legal proceedings regarding its 1,000-foot string of buoys in the Rio Grande near Eagle Pass. A hearing occurred before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. However, the court’s three-judge panel has yet to issue a ruling, leaving the matter unresolved.
As the Biden Administration proceeds with the border wall extension, the implications for immigration policies and border security remain subjects of ongoing debate and legal scrutiny. The decision, which diverges from campaign promises, underscores the complex and contentious nature of border-related issues in the United States.
