The Supreme Court declines to take the border wall case

0
37



The Trump administration has waived certain legal requirements to proceed with the construction of the border wall. Environmental groups opposing the barriers say the exemption from the regulations is at the expense of wildlife in the region and have challenged authorities provided to DHS to do so.

The lawsuit filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, among others, is one of a series of legal challenges against the construction of President Donald Trump's iconic border wall.

"We are disappointed that the Supreme Court does not consider the flagrant abuse of the law by the Trump administration to accelerate the construction of the border wall," said Jean Su, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. "This administration has mocked the Constitution to build a hugely destructive wall. We will continue to fight these illegal exemptions and we will do everything we can to prevent further damage to the beautiful border lands."

Jason Rylander, senior advisor to endangered species at Defenders of Wildlife, one of the other groups that presented the challenge, said they are "disappointed" with Monday's decision.

"We were hoping that this was the time for the court to address the serious constitutional issues surrounding this administration's resignation from environmental law to accelerate construction of the border wall. It is unfortunate that they did not, but we believe that there are still problems. serious, "he said, adding that this is the" end of the line "for this particular challenge.

Last week, a federal appeals court ruled that the administration does not have the authority to divert funds from the Pentagon to build additional barriers on the southwest border.
In a 2-1 ruling, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said the $ 2.5 billion transfer bypassed Congress, which has the authority to appropriate the money. While the ruling was a victory for environmental groups and states that question the use of military funds, a Supreme Court suspension, issued last year that allows the funds to be used, remains in place for now.

The central question in the lawsuit that the Supreme Court rejected on Monday is whether the authority given to the DHS clerk to waive legal requirements to build border barriers violates the Constitution's separation of powers. The lower courts have said that the authority does not violate the separation of powers.

The Trump administration is not the first to waive certain legal requirements to proceed with the expeditious construction of barriers along the southwest border. But the case filed in court involves exemption determinations issued in 2018 and 2019.

The petition to the Supreme Court questioned the constitutionality of DHS's decision to waive dozens of federal laws to erect barriers in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here