The Supreme Court has turned down a challenge against President Trump’s wall.
The plaintiff alleged Trump’s wall will have big environmental impact.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up a challenge to President Donald Trump’s border wall Monday, which asserted that the administration violated the Constitution when it exempted border barrier projects from environmental regulations.
The plaintiffs warn of adverse effects to local ecosystems should the administration raise a wall along the border with Mexico.
“It’s disappointing that the Supreme Court won’t consider this important constitutional issue,” Brian Segee, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), told The Daily Caller News Foundation by email. “Trump has abused his power to wreak havoc along the border to score political points. He’s illegally sweeping aside bedrock environmental and public health laws. We’ll continue to fight Trump’s dangerous wall in the courts and in Congress.”
A 1996 law authorized the attorney general (and later the Homeland Security secretary) to build border barriers to deter illegal immigration. In that connection, the law gave the Department of Homeland Security secretary power to exempt certain border projects from environmental laws like the Endangered Species Act, as well as other legal rules, to ensure quick construction.
The law also restricts the jurisdiction of courts to hear legal challenges to the secretary’s waivers, and provides that such lawsuits must be lodged on an accelerated timetable.
A coalition of green advocacy groups sued after the Trump administration issued two waivers under the ’96 law for border wall projects in southern California. The plaintiffs argued the waiver and jurisdictional provisions violate the constitutional separation of powers.