Thread: Court Says Border Fence May Proceed

Court Says Border Fence May Proceed
By Mark Impomeni
Jun 23rd 2008 6:30PM

The Supreme Court gave illegal immigration opponents and the Bush Administration a key victory today when it rejected a case brought by environmental groups challenging the construction of a section of the new border fence with Mexico. The case challenged the government's right to waive environmental requirements in the construction of a two-mile stretch of the fence near Naco, Arizona. Environmental groups said that the fence jeopardized endangered species that cross the border in the area to mate.

Last year, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff utilized his power to waive the regulations, under an authorization in the Real ID Act of 2005, to allow the construction of the fence to continue on its rapid pace. About 331 miles of fencing have been constructed in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, including the disputed two-mile section. Chertoff has used the waiver authority a total of three times, including once to waive seven separate federal regulations for a section of the fence near San Diego, CA. The Department of Homeland Security issued a statement praising the decision.

"As fence construction proceeds, the department will continue to be a good steward of the environment, and consult with appropriate state, local, and tribal officials."

Critics of the department and the border fence said that the decision and the fence would ultimately have no impact on the illegal immigration problem. "I am extremely disappointed in the court's decision," said Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. "Without a comprehensive plan, this fence is just another quick fix."

But the American people do not support a comprehensive approach to immigration reform, as the failure of the 2006 Senate immigration compromise demonstrated. Americans support enforcement of the border first, and may be willing to revisit the nation's immigration system after some control over the flow of illegal immigrants has been established. Today's decision by the Court will be embraced by a majority of the population not only as upholding the law as passed by Congress, but as a common sense approach to a growing problem.
http://oneoldvet.com/?p=6939
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2 ... y-proceed/

U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear border fence challenge

12:00 AM CDT on Tuesday, June 24, 2008
By DAVID McLEMORE / The Dallas Morning News
dmclemore@dallasnews.com

The Supreme Court gave the Bush administration a victory Monday when it declined to step into the controversy over the waiver of environmental laws to speed construction of a 670-mile border security fence.

The Associated Press
Opponents of the fence, this stretch in Nogales, Ariz., say there are legal and legislative challenges still in play. But with a number of legal and legislative challenges still in play, it is not the end to efforts by border residents to halt construction of the fence, fence opponents said.

The court refused without comment the challenge by the Sierra Club and Friends of Wildlife, which argued that the waiver authority given Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to speed fence construction by bypassing environmental laws is unconstitutional.

Mr. Chertoff has waived more than 30 laws via the authority granted him by the Real ID Act of 2005 to meet the Bush administration's goal to finish the half-completed fence by year's end.

"I am extremely disappointed in the court's decision," said U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss. "The waiver will only prolong [Homeland Security] from addressing the real issue, their lack of a comprehensive border security plan."

Mr. Thompson heads the House Homeland Security Committee and is among 14 House Democrats who had announced support of the environmental groups' challenge.

U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, applauded the court.

"Today's decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the right of the administration to pursue the expeditious construction of the border fence is a victory for the American people," he said.

Mr. Smith noted that the estimated half-million people who cross the border illegally each year are the reason Congress authorized the building of the fence.

Oliver Bernstein, spokesman for the Sierra Club in Austin, stressed that the court's action doesn't end efforts in Texas to halt the fence.

"We had hoped to highlight that the waiver authority is a constitutional violation. That issue is out before the public, and we believe that public concern is now greater than before," Mr. Bernstein said. "The pressure is on Congress to correct the matter."

Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid is working with many of the more than 400 South Texas landowners whose property faces condemnation for the fence. Those cases argue that Homeland Security did not properly consult with property owners before filing condemnation lawsuits.

Additionally, a lawsuit filed by the city of El Paso against Homeland Security – and joined by a broad coalition of Texas-based environmental groups – is in federal court in El Paso.

The El Paso case is similar in that it is a constitutional challenge to Mr. Chertoff's waiver authority. But where the first case dealt with a two-mile stretch of the fence in Arizona, the El Paso suit covers much of the fence's track in Texas and seeks to declare unconstitutional the provisions of the Real ID Act that provided the waiver authority.

On May 16, the Texas Border Coalition, comprised of elected officials and business leaders, filed a class-action lawsuit against Homeland Security and the Border Patrol to halt construction of the fence.

The suit claims that Homeland Security violated due process and constitutional equal protection guarantees by failing to negotiate in good faith with border landowners.

"We will not sit idly by while our property is seized by the federal government to build an expedient but useless, expensive and potentially damaging wall across the Texas-Mexico border," said coalition president Chad Foster, mayor of Eagle Pass. "We are determined to stop Secretary Chertoff from acting as if he is above the law."

On June 19, the University of Texas at Brownsville asked the federal court for relief after Homeland Security said it planned to seize about two acres of university land for fence construction.

The land on which the fence would be built would effectively slice off up to 180 acres of university property from the rest of the campus, severely curtailing land for the university's growth and relegating the property to a "no-man's land," said UT-Brownsville President Juliet V. Garcia.

The motion asks the court to enforce an earlier court-ordered agreement that Homeland Security and UT-Brownsville work together to pick a site agreeable to both.

A hearing has been set for Monday at the federal court in Brownsville.

A bill proposed by U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., would repeal the portion of the Real ID Act that provides the waiver authority; 49 members of Congress have signed on to the bill.

One of those, U.S. Rep. Ruben Hinojosa, D-Mercedes, called the court decision a disappointment.

"This decision means that DHS's power to waive any and all laws without limitations will continue to go unchecked and therefore continue to endanger the security of Texas and our environment," he said.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... be453.html