The U.S. government had been suffering an unrecoverable loss of a half-million dollars a day until Monday, when the Supreme Court paused U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone’s order stopping construction of a border wall in the Big Bend region of southwest Texas.
On October 2, Judge Cardone temporarily barred the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from continuing construction on the border wall “until and unless” it satisfied the plaintiffs’ environmental and other objections.
Then, on October 14, Judge Cardone denied the government’s request to pause her ban until it could seek Supreme Court review of the matter.
As a result, DHS was forced to apply to the Supreme Court for a stay of the ban, which the High Court granted on Monday. The stay affords DHS time to file a writ of certiorari petitioning the High Court to take up the case.
The Supreme Court cited several reasons for granting the stay, including:
- The government “is exceedingly likely to prevail on its argument” that Judge Cardone lacked the authority to halt the border wall’s construction.
- Cardone’s ruling “impedes the Government from advancing its ‘compelling interests’ in border security and integrity.”
- The government is suffering permanent harm from the half-million dollar daily costs being incurred by the delayed construction, since there is no way to recover those costs.
- Homeland Security’s interests outweigh any aesthetic, recreational, and environmental harm alleged by the plaintiffs.
- “The balance of the equities also favors the Government.”
In conclusion, the Supreme Court ruled that the construction ban is lifted until it either refuses to take up the case or takes it up and decides it:
“The injunction entered by the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas in case No. 3:26–cv–01099 is stayed pending the filing and disposition of the Government’s petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought. Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.”
