Thread: DHS to build 20-mile wall along border in New Mexico

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Monday, April 9, 2018

Homeland Security began building a border wall in New Mexico on Monday, moving to replace vehicle barriers with a modern fence that will deter pedestrians attempting to cross in the remote desert west of El Paso.

The 20-mile project has been on the books for some time and the contract was awarded Jan. 22, meaning it was finalized before the recent fight over border wall money in the new 2018 spending bill.

But the administration says it wouldn’t have been built but for President Trump’s push for more border wall.

“We need effective barriers to deny the entry of illegal aliens and contraband,” said Aaron A. Hull, chief patrol agent for the El Paso Sector of the Border Patrol. “Our agents know that a balance of physical infrastructure, technology and personnel is key to securing the border and keeping our communities safe.”

The fence will begin just west of the Santa Teresa port of entry and run 20 miles west.

It will run between 18 and 30 feet high, and will be bollard-style construction, giving agents the ability to see through to Mexico so they have awareness of what’s going on, and can spot migrants or smugglers preparing for an attempt to jump the border. A see-thru design also helps agents spot and avoid potential ambushes by rock-throwers, which accounts for a large number of injuries to agents.

The New Mexico wall contract went to Barnard Construction, a Montana-based company. At $73 million, it works out to less than $4 million per mile of fencing — far cheaper than estimates for the rest of Mr. Trump’s wall, which is pegged at about $25 million per mile.

The area where the new fencing will be erected is currently protected by vehicle barriers, which amount to a single bar, about belt-high, held up by poles spaced several feet apart. They can hinder a car or truck barreling through the desert but do little to stop smugglers and illegal immigrants on foot.

Homeland Security officials said with Ciudad Juarez, a Mexican city of nearly 2 million people, so close to the spot, the vehicle barriers are no longer considered effective enough.

The barriers are a legacy of the Bush fence-building push of a decade ago. Originally Congress had ordered 700 miles of the border to be sealed with double-tier full-sized fencing, but the Bush administration balked and Congress backed off its demands, leaving decisions in the hands of Homeland Security.

The result was 354 miles of border protected by a pedestrian fence and 300 miles protected by vehicle barriers.

Now the Trump administration is going back to replace some of the vehicle barriers with the most up-to-date fencing.

The project will not use any of the designs Mr. Trump ordered last year.

Congress moved to block those designs from being used for building done pursuant to the 2018 spending bill. Border Patrol officials said last month they are still studying the bill to see what’s allowed.

The New Mexico project joins another wall replacement project in southern California that started last month.

Neither of those is part of the 100 miles or so of new and replacement wall Homeland Security says was approved in last month’s new spending bill.

“Whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat, we need a wall,” Mr. Trump said at a Cabinet meeting Monday morning. “It will stop a lot of people we don’t want coming in this country.”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...er-new-mexico/

Isn't there something like $700 million that was apportioned under GWB for border fencing?

The New Mexico wall contract went to Barnard Construction, a Montana-based company. At $73 million, it works out to less than $4 million per mile of fencing — far cheaper than estimates for the rest of Mr. Trump’s wall, which is pegged at about $25 million per mile.

Of course it's far cheaper because it is a fence, not a wall!

Secure Fence Act of 2006 - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006
The Washington Office on Latin America writes that the extremely high cost of complying with the Secure Fence Act's mandate—estimated at US$4.1 billion, or more than the Border Patrol's entire annual budget of US$3.55 billion—was the main reason that the fence was not fully built.

• 
  
  Santa Teresa Border Wall Replacement Project to Begin
  Media Release Subtitl
  

Robert Holguin@RobertKFOX14

This is the “post-on-rail fence” that is being replaced by a much more robust “bollard style” fence that is 18-feet high. @CBP says the new barrier will extend west for 20 miles. #borderwall #Immigration

9:20 AM - Apr 9, 2018 · Juárez, Chihuahua

“Whether you’re a Republican or a Democrat, we need a wall,” Mr. Trump said at a Cabinet meeting Monday morning. “It will stop a lot of people we don’t want coming in this country.”

Wall, fence will do nothing to stop the "fear" asylum seekers you are letting in by the tens of thousands monthly. Don't wait another 45-90 days as you're allowing, get out your pen and write a directive, have lady daca release a memo, just like obama did with the Morton memo that made catch & release the norm for 8yrs & now 13mths with you trump - No asylums taken - shop closed - no entry w/o papers. Apply from your country.

Types of credible fear

There are two kinds of credible fear recognized in United States law:[3][4]

Credible fear of persecution: This is defined in Section 235(b)(1)(B)(v) of the Immigration and Nationality Act as "a significant possibility, taking into account the credibility of the statements made by the alien in support of his or her claim and such other facts as are known to the officer, that the alien could establish eligibility for asylum under Section 208 [of the INA]." Note that demonstrating a credible fear of persecution does not mean that the person has received asylum or definitively established eligibility for it. It simply means that the person stands a good chance of establishing eligibility for asylum.
Credible fear of torture: The applicant must demonstrate "a significant possibility that he or she is eligible for withholding of removal or deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture, pursuant to 8 CFR 208.16 or 208.17."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credible_fear

It's not a memo, it's the law. The Morton Memo merely explains the law to DHS employees. That's why this stupid law needs to be repealed. That's why Trump and DHS are calling for immediate action by Congress to fix these loopholes in the law so DHS can legally change their procedures and end this nonsense.

Wrong - it is a directive from obama to be released by Morton in a memo. And trump's order of 1/17 was not written correctly just like the muslim country ban. Would think something properly written would not take another 13mths plus to stop catch & release - trump was too busy trying to amnesty dacas and then some.

Furthermore, a memo from Pres. Obama's Immigration and Customs Enforcement chief, John Morton, issued on January 4, 2010, ordered that any alien who enters a "credible fear" claim must be released into the interior of the United States if "the alien poses neither a flight risk nor a danger to the community, and no additional factors weigh against the release of the alien." The memo also orders ICE agents to grant parole to the illegal aliens, protecting them from future enforcement efforts until their case is heard. The Morton Memo of Jan. 4, 2010 has yet to be rescinded by the Trump Administration despite Pres. Trump's executive order of Jan. 25, 2017 calling for an end to catch-and-release because of bureaucratic roadblocks.

[/QUOTE]

That's because that's what the law requires. DHS came under fire for not abiding the law which is probably why the 2010 memo was written to correct the problems. The memo if you read the PDF which I won't copy and paste that shows the entire Memo even cites the laws it's enforcing with the Memo. So even if you rescind the Memo, the law still applies until the law is repealed. It's not like DACA where there was no underlying law.

Anyway, I just wanted to bring this to your attention, because the procedure won't change until the law requiring it is changed.