Staff Reports
Senator John Cornyn has done something rare these days: he listened to his own constituents and put a hard question to the Department of Homeland Security. In a clear, public letter to Secretary Markwayne Mullin, Cornyn asked DHS to slow down and meet with local leaders before moving forward with major border work inside the Big Bend region. That matters — and not just to people who love the desert and desert critters. It matters to anyone who cares about smart border security, proper use of taxpayer dollars, and following the law.
Cornyn’s letter demands answers on Big Bend border projects
The new development is simple and important. Senator Cornyn wrote a letter asking DHS to sit down with sheriffs, county judges, landowners and park advocates to explain planned work in Big Bend National Park and Big Bend Ranch State Park. He noted the steep riverbank cliffs and rugged terrain already act as a natural barrier and urged DHS to reconsider or pause construction until locals’ concerns are addressed. This is not a stunt. It puts federal oversight pressure on an agency that used a legal waiver to speed the project.
What DHS and CBP are proposing — and the legal shortcut they used
Customs and Border Protection has described plans for about 205 miles of patrol roads, roughly 17 miles of vehicle barriers, lighting, cameras and underground fiber in the Brewster County area. To move the work along, DHS invoked a waiver under Section 102 of IIRIRA to bypass normal environmental and historic‑preservation rules. That waiver already appears in the Federal Register and has triggered lawsuits and loud local pushback. Cornyn is right to ask whether the administration should be rushing into large contracts and heavy ground disturbance before answering basic questions.
Local officials, sheriffs and even rivals agree: get local buy‑in
Opposition to a big wall through Big Bend comes from a strange and telling coalition: county sheriffs (many Republicans), county judges, former park superintendents, landowners and conservation groups. Even Democratic Senate nominee James Talarico has seized on local concerns to complain about waste and corruption. The argument from local law enforcement is practical, not political — rugged terrain and targeted technology can work better than bulldozing through a national park. Cornyn siding with those locals turns a grassroots fight into a federal oversight question, and that’s the right move.
Pause, meet, and plan — the sensible path forward
We can all agree on a simple, conservative principle: secure the border, but do it smartly and with accountability. If DHS truly wants better security, it should meet with stakeholders, show maps and plans, and explain why each mile of road or barrier is needed. If projects are justified, fine — build them with respect for property and the law. If not, don’t waste $46.5 billion from the One Big Beautiful Bill on big contracts and heavy clearing that make Texans poorer and parks uglier. Senator Cornyn asked the right questions. Now Secretary Mullin should answer them — not with a press release, but with a meeting and a plan that earns local support.
