Border Infrastructure Project in West Texas Raises Concerns

The Trump administration’s proposal to erect new border infrastructure in the Big Bend region of West Texas has met with strong resistance. Landowners, environmental groups, and some local officials oppose the project. They argue it might limit access to remote areas along the Rio Grande.

Since the Rio Grande is both an international boundary and a dynamic river system, border structures in this area are often planned inland. This differs from building directly on the riverbank. Newsweek has sought comment from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

The Claim

Isaac Saul, founder of Tangle, claimed in a podcast appearance with Tim Miller that federal border wall construction would cede large land areas to Mexico. The Bulwark shared this claim on social media, receiving over 375,000 views.

Saul stated, “According to DHS, of where the wall is going to be, the acreage that will now be on the Mexico side, it looks like they’re about to basically put Americans on the other side of 280,000 acres of Texas land.” He added, “So Americans are going to be fenced out. We’re giving some land to Mexico? We’re giving 280,000 acres of land and the most important water source in West Texas to Mexico.” Miller summarized, “Territorial concessions to Mexico was happening under the Trump administration?” Saul confirmed this claim.

Saul described how his family’s West Texas ranch received an eminent domain notice. The federal government plans to place a barrier through their property, limiting access to the Rio Grande.

The Facts

Saul later adjusted his statements in an email to Newsweek, clarifying that the term “territorial concession” originated from host Tim Miller. The Bulwark’s post shaped the interview context.

Saul calculated the 280,000-acre figure using AI to analyze DHS maps of proposed wall routes. He explained, “I actually came to it by putting the maps into Claude and asking for estimates of how much land Texans would be cut off from.” Saul emphasized that the wall’s layout restricts American access, giving Mexican agricultural workers easier access to the river than U.S. landowners.

Building barriers inland leaves thousands of U.S. acres south of the physical fence. This does not change the international boundary or transfer land ownership to Mexico. The Boundary Treaty of 1970 with Mexico fixes the border along the river’s normal channel. To avoid disrupting flood control and river flow, contractors follow International Boundary and Water Commission guidelines to build back from the banks. Constructing barriers north of the river doesn’t mean territorial concession or any transfer of sovereignty to Mexico.

The U.S. government can acquire private property for infrastructure through purchases or eminent domain, respecting Fifth Amendment compensation. While infrastructure projects complicate property and water rights access, they don’t alter ownership or territorial control. Authorities retain access rights on acquired land, with specifics depending on each property.

The Ruling

False.

Building north of the Rio Grande creates challenges for Texas property owners but doesn’t give land to Mexico. The international border remains set by treaty at the Rio Grande. Land north of the river stays under U.S. sovereignty, and Mexico gains no legal rights or titles.

For further comments, contact Newsweek editors John Fitzpatrick and Cristina Diciu.