Texas Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham is urging the Trump administration to reconsider how it approaches border security in the Big Bend region, arguing that the area’s rugged terrain already provides natural protection and that federal construction projects must respect state property rights and local communities.
Buckingham’s comments came Tuesday, Nov. 10, one day after the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the federal government to resume border barrier construction in West Texas while litigation challenging the project continues.
The Republican land commissioner, who has supported aggressive border enforcement policies, said protecting Texas from illegal crossings and preserving the Big Bend landscape should not be competing priorities.
“Texas can secure our border and protect Big Bend,” Buckingham said in a statement released by the Texas General Land Office. “We can confront the cartels, stop drug and human trafficking, and support our law enforcement officers while respecting the rugged country that makes Texas extraordinary.”
Buckingham emphasized that the region’s remote geography, steep canyons and rocky terrain already present substantial obstacles to unauthorized crossings.
“Big Bend’s rocky, remote terrain itself serves as a natural deterrent to illegal crossings, providing a layer of border security,” she said.
Supreme Court clears way for construction
The Supreme Court’s Nov. 9 decision temporarily blocked an Oct. 2 preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone that had halted border barrier and road construction in the Big Bend Sector.
The justices concluded that the federal government was likely to prevail on its argument that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider certain challenges to the administration’s authority to waive environmental and conservation laws.
The majority also cited the federal government’s border security interests and evidence that the injunction was costing approximately $500,000 per day.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson indicated that she would have denied the administration’s request.
The ruling does not resolve the underlying lawsuit or determine whether every proposed construction project is lawful. It allows work to proceed while further legal proceedings continue.
The Trump administration has argued that additional border infrastructure is necessary to prevent illegal crossings, drug trafficking and exploitation of gaps in existing border security systems.
Opponents contend that a continuous physical barrier would be particularly damaging in Big Bend, where the Rio Grande passes through remote desert landscapes, mountains and protected public lands.
Buckingham previously ordered federal contractor to stop work
Buckingham’s latest statement follows a confrontation between her office and federal border wall contractors earlier this year.
On July 31, Buckingham issued cease-and-desist letters to U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Barnard Construction, accusing the company of clearing more than a mile of state-managed land in Presidio County without authorization.
According to the General Land Office, heavy equipment had been used to remove vegetation and alter the terrain on property managed by the state.
The agency said its leases prohibit excavation, construction and other land modifications without express written permission.
Buckingham demanded that the unauthorized activities stop immediately and that the affected land be restored, including the submission of a reclamation plan for state approval.
The disputed property included portions of a roughly 10,000-acre hunting, recreation and grazing lease held by Trans Pecos Ice LLC.
At the time, CBP acknowledged the dispute and said it was working with the General Land Office and the contractor to resolve the matter. The federal agency said contractors were responsible for verifying that they had legal access to property before beginning work.
The Supreme Court’s latest ruling does not independently resolve the state’s property rights dispute or determine whether the earlier land clearing was authorized.
Land commissioner has supported technological alternatives
Buckingham’s position is consistent with comments she made in September, when she told the Houston Chronicle’s editorial board that a virtual border wall would make more sense across much of West Texas than a continuous physical barrier.
Such an approach would rely on surveillance equipment, sensors and other technology to detect unauthorized crossings without requiring extensive construction across difficult terrain.
“The bottom line is there are places where physical barriers make sense, and there are places where they don’t,” Buckingham said in that interview.
Her position places her alongside several other Texas Republicans who have questioned the practicality of constructing a traditional border wall throughout the Big Bend region.
Gov. Greg Abbott has also identified the area’s rugged geography as an opportunity to deploy technology rather than relying exclusively on physical barriers.
Opposition crosses political lines
The proposed construction has generated bipartisan opposition from elected officials, ranchers, conservation organizations and residents across the Big Bend region.
Sheriffs representing Brewster, Culberson, Hudspeth, Presidio and Terrell counties previously signed a letter questioning whether a continuous physical barrier would be an effective use of border security resources.
The sheriffs argued that the region’s geography requires a different approach from the heavily populated stretches of the southern border where physical fencing is already common.
Local officials have also raised concerns about access to the Rio Grande, potential flooding, damage to wildlife habitat and the economic importance of preserving the region’s natural attractions.
In August, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, requested additional consultation with local communities before construction proceeded. A bipartisan coalition of 46 Texas House members also urged state leaders to intervene.
State sovereignty remains central to dispute
The Texas General Land Office manages approximately 13 million acres of state land, including property in West Texas that generates revenue supporting public education.
The agency’s responsibility for those lands has created an unusual conflict between a Republican statewide official and a Republican presidential administration over how border security projects should proceed.
Buckingham has not abandoned her support for border enforcement. Instead, she is insisting that the federal government recognize the state’s property interests and account for the region’s environmental and geographic characteristics.
“Securing our border must also include respecting Texas’ state lands and the communities we are working to protect,” Buckingham said Tuesday. “This administration owes Texans a strategy that accounts for the terrain, listens to local communities and protects this irreplaceable landscape for generations to come.”
Buckingham also pledged that the General Land Office would continue defending Texas’ authority over its property.
The Supreme Court’s decision removes a significant legal obstacle to the federal construction program, but questions remain about the precise locations, designs and environmental consequences of proposed barriers throughout Big Bend.
For Buckingham and the communities challenging the project, the central question is no longer simply whether the federal government can resume construction. It is whether the administration will adjust its plans to accommodate the region’s geography, state property rights and the concerns of the people who live there.
