Key takeaways
- The Supreme Court on November 9, 2026 stayed a federal injunction, allowing the Trump administration to resume border barrier construction in the Big Bend sector of West Texas.
- The unsigned order was 8-1, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson the only justice noted as opposed, and it is temporary rather than a final ruling on the merits.
- The Court did not decide whether the Homeland Security waivers behind the project are lawful, and the case returns to a federal district court in El Paso.
- Opponents including the Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity condemned the order, while the administration says the injunction was costly and undermined border security.
The Supreme Court on November 9, 2026 allowed the Trump administration to resume building the Big Bend border wall and related roads in West Texas, lifting a federal judge’s injunction while the lawsuit continues. According to the Texas Tribune, the unsigned order was 8-1 and is temporary. It matters because the affected Border Patrol sector includes Big Bend National Park, and the dispute tests how far the Homeland Security secretary can go in waiving environmental laws.
What did the Supreme Court decide on the Big Bend border wall?
The Court granted an emergency application to stay a preliminary injunction issued on October 2, 2026 by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone of El Paso. CBS News reported that the order lifted the halt on construction of the wall and related infrastructure across the sector, which covers more than 500 miles of the southern border.
The majority concluded the government was “exceedingly likely to prevail” on its argument that the district court lacked jurisdiction over the plaintiffs’ major-questions-doctrine claim. That doctrine holds that agencies need clear congressional authorization for decisions of major economic or political significance. UPI reported that the majority also read the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act as favoring quick border construction over the harms the plaintiffs alleged.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote only that she “would deny the application for stay.” No other dissent was noted in the order.
What does the order not decide?
The order is an interim step, not a final judgment. Nation of Change reported that the justices did not rule on whether the waivers underlying the project are lawful. The Texas Tribune said the stay lasts until the Supreme Court takes up the case or the dispute is resolved in the El Paso district court.
The case is Mullin v. Center for Biological Diversity (No. 26A560), according to Breitbart’s account of the docket. Markwayne Mullin is the current Homeland Security secretary. According to Yahoo News, he and his predecessor, Kristi Noem, issued waivers of environmental and conservation laws earlier this year to begin work on this section.
The Texas Tribune counted it as one of six lawsuits seeking to halt border wall construction in Big Bend, so other litigation remains.
What will be built in and around Big Bend National Park?
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Rodney Scott has said the proposed 30-foot wall will not cut through the national park itself. CBS News, citing CBP, reported that other infrastructure would, including more than 200 miles of patrol roads and about 17 miles of vehicle barriers.
The administration has awarded contracts for hundreds of miles of barriers, roads and surveillance infrastructure in the region, according to a report on the ruling. Officials have said they do not plan a large wall or fence inside the park.
The Texas Tribune said the sector spans 517 miles of border and accounts for about 1.6% of migrant apprehensions along the entire border. Challengers argue that low figure undercuts the reasons given for the waivers.
Why do the administration and opponents disagree?
Solicitor General John Sauer described the injunction as “baseless” in the emergency application and warned that any gap in border defenses would attract cartels. The administration also told the Court, according to The Texan, that a CBP employee estimated the pause was costing nearly half a million dollars per day.
The plaintiffs, an environmental nonprofit, a professional riverboat guide and a religious organization, argued that resuming work would permanently alter a landscape that includes Big Bend National Park, Big Bend Ranch State Park and nearly 200 miles of the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River corridor, CBS News reported.
Laiken Jordahl of the Center for Biological Diversity called the ruling “horrific,” according to the Daily Wire. The Sierra Club said on X that it was outraged, as Outside magazine reported.
A procedural point shaped the route to the justices. The Context Corner report said the waiver statutes are written to bypass federal appeals courts, which is why the administration went straight to the Supreme Court.
How does this fit the political moment?
The order arrived one week after the November 3 midterms, in which Democrats gained control of the House and Senate, according to Wikipedia’s summary of the 2026 elections. Democrats do not take control until the new Congress convenes, a transition covered in Intelligence Report’s analysis of what Trump can still do before Democrats take over.
What to watch
- District court proceedings in El Paso: Judge Cardone’s court will resume handling the merits, including the challenge to the Homeland Security waivers.
- A possible petition for Supreme Court review: the stay holds until the Court agrees to hear the case or the lower court resolves it.
- Construction activity inside the park: the first road and barrier work in Big Bend National Park and Big Bend Ranch State Park will show how quickly contractors move.
- The five other lawsuits: rulings in those cases could affect parts of the project outside this injunction.
- Congressional reaction: whether incoming Democratic committee leaders seek oversight of the waivers once the new Congress takes office.
Frequently asked questions
Can construction on the Big Bend border wall resume now?
Yes. The Supreme Court stayed a district court injunction on November 9, 2026, so the Trump administration can resume barrier and road construction in the Big Bend sector. The stay is temporary and lasts while the case continues in federal court in El Paso or until the justices take it up.
How did the Supreme Court vote on the Big Bend order?
The unsigned order was 8-1. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote only that she would deny the stay application, and no other dissent was noted. The majority said the government was likely to prevail on its argument that the district court lacked jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' major-questions claim.
Will a wall be built through Big Bend National Park?
Not exactly, according to CBP. Commissioner Rodney Scott has said the planned 30-foot wall will not cut through the national park, but patrol roads of more than 200 miles and about 17 miles of vehicle barriers would. Opponents dispute the need for any of it.
Sources
- Trump's Big Bend border wall construction can resume after U.S. Supreme Court ruling
- Supreme Court allows Trump administration to resume border wall construction in Big Bend region
- Supreme Court allows Trump's Big Bend border wall to continue
- Supreme Court lets border wall work resume in Big Bend
- SCOTUS delivers Trump much-needed win on the border
- Supreme Court allows Trump's Big Bend border wall to continue (Yahoo News)
- SCOTUS Opens Door For Trump To Expand Border Wall
- What the Supreme Court's Border Wall Ruling Means for Big Bend National Park
- 'Horrific' decision by Supreme Court allows Big Bend border wall construction
- Supreme Court allows Trump administration to resume Big Bend border wall construction
Top image: P. Hughes / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 4.0)
This article was produced by the Intelligence Report Desk. Sources are linked below.
