Why did Biden finally decide to build more border wall?

President Joe Biden‘s decision to move forward with the construction of new border wall reflects a failure of his immigration policies amid widespread criticism ahead of next year’s election.

The move, originally announced over the summer, first received widespread media coverage in October after Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas waived more than 20 environmental laws, kick-starting the process despite the president’s campaign promise not to continue the Trump administration’s border policies.

WHAT IS HAMAS, AND WHO IS THE COMMANDER KNOWN AS ‘THE GUEST’ BEHIND THE TERROR ATTACK ON ISRAEL?

Customs and Border Protection additionally outlined in August the dimensions and specifics for “up to 20 miles” of new border construction, which included “18-foot high, six-inch diameter bollards embedded into a movable, concrete, jersey barrier-style base system.”

The projects also calls for gates, cameras, fiber optic and close-circuit television equipment, and erosion and drainage control.

Senior administration officials, including White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and even the president himself, have stated that Biden is law-bound to move forward with the construction of some 20 miles of new barrier, claims that are technically true.

The funding used for these new projects was appropriated back in 2019 for the explicit construction of new border wall by the end of September 2024. The Biden administration had previously stonewalled the construction of this specific border wall project for years. On his first day in office, the president ordered a review and action plan for federal agencies to “develop a plan for the redirection of funds concerning the southern border wall.”

The Government Accountability Office reviewed Biden’s Day 1 immigration proclamation and found that it did not violate the law.

“Delays associated with meeting statutory prerequisites and determining funding needs in light of changed circumstances constitute programmatic delays, not impoundments,” the GAO report reads before noting that total “cancellation of this funding can only be accomplished through a duly enacted law.”

However, after Congress declined to reallocate those funds at the president’s request, Biden’s “hands are tied,” said Taxpayers for Common Sense analyst Gabe Murphy.

“The money needs to go out the door,” Murphy said in a statement, citing 1974’s Impoundment Control Act. “An administration can’t substitute its own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law.”

The administration is currently defending its action in court in a joint lawsuit filed by Texas and Missouri, noted Migration Policy Institute Communications Director Michelle Mittelstadt, and could soon be forced through legal means to jump-start construction.

“The combined case is before a federal judge in Texas,” she said. “A request for an injunction that would require the government to restart construction is expected soon given briefings in the legal case ended in mid-September.”

The timing of these new construction projects comes amid a historic surge of illegal border crossings, including more than 48,000 Venezuelan nationals over the summer. CBP has made 245,000 arrests in the Rio Grande Valley alone this year.

And just one day after Mayorkas waived environmental laws to expedite wall construction, the Biden administration also announced that it would immediately begin deporting Venezuelans apprehended at the border.

“This again shows how we are committed to imposing consequences on those who cross the border unlawfully, and it’s a direct consequence of these individuals not having availed themselves of the lawful pathways that we have created and expanded, which includes the humanitarian parole process for them as well as nationals and their family members, that have already allowed more than 73,000 as well to enter,” a senior administration official briefing reporters ahead of the repatriation flights announcement said.

Still, Biden has remained adamant that border walls will not stem the flow of northern migration.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

“No,” the president answered flatly when asked if a border wall is an effective tool. “The border wall — the money was appropriated for the border wall. I tried to get to them to reappropriate it, to redirect that money. They didn’t. They wouldn’t. And in the meantime, there’s nothing under the law other than they have to use the money for what it was appropriated. I can’t stop that.”

“There are endless reports of smugglers cutting through the metal bollards with a handsaw that can be purchased at any local hardware store. Fencing requires frequent repair and round-the-clock monitoring and, as a result, is not an effective strategy on its own,” Mittelstadt agreed. “It pushes more people into the hands of smugglers, it increases the numbers of injuries and deaths, it sparks very real environmental and wildlife protection issues given the sensitive nature of the border terrain, and it soaks up resources that could be more effectively spent elsewhere.”