Earlier this week the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal by environmental groups in a case brought to slow the progress on the construction of the border fence, a giant step forward in the effort to secure America’s borders. This was not only good for border security, but it also respected the legislative authority of Congress.
Congress granted DHS environmental-waiver authority in 2005. This waiver accelerates border fence construction by allowing DHS to bypass requirements of certain environmental laws. Environmental groups,
recognizing an opportunity to impede this progress, decided to challenge the ability of DHS to use the waiver for the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area.
DHS invoking a waiver granted by Congress does not mean that the environment will suffer as a result or that DHS will take environmentally harmful measures; it simply means that DHS is allowed to bypass bureaucratic red tape and make meaningful progress on border fence construction. Environmental groups will almost certainly hail this decision as a choice by the Supreme Court to degrade the environment. In reality, this decision protects the valid exercise of legislative power by Congress.
The Plaintiff environmental groups are not in this debate to save the environment. Saving the environment is merely a thin veil by the left to prevent any attempt to stem the tide of illegal immigration in the United States. An earlier piece “Moving Forward to Secure the Border” emphasizes that a broken border leads to a plethora of problems including drug smuggling and human trafficking. These problems will only increase if groups who seek to impede progress on border security succeed.