Immigration

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich Sues Biden Administration for Not Studying the Environmental Impact of More Migrants Coming Into the U.S.

A signature priority of President Donald Trump's administration was paring back federal environmental laws. Republicans are now stretching the definition of those same laws to save the former president's immigration policies.

|

President Joe Biden's modest rollback of former President Donald Trump's border policies is attracting some novel legal challenges from anti-immigrant conservatives.

On Sunday, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich sued the Biden administration in the U.S. District Court of Arizona over the federal government's pause on border wall construction and the decision to end a policy requiring asylum seekers to remain in Mexico.

Both policy changes, argues Brnovich, should have had to undergo the kinds of environmental review normally required of federal infrastructure projects because they would increase Arizona's population.

"Migrants (like everyone else) need housing, infrastructure, hospitals, and schools. They drive cars, purchase goods, and use public parks and other facilities. Their actions also directly result in the release of pollutants, carbon dioxide, and other greenhouse gases," reads the complaint. "All of these activities have significant environment impact."

His lawsuit takes issue with two specific actions of the Biden administration.

The first is a January 20 executive order freezing border wall construction and redirecting border wall funding to other priorities. The second is the administration's February decision to start unwinding Trump's Migrant Protection Protocol program (MPP) which required people who showed up at the southern border seeking asylum to return to Mexico while they wait for a court hearing. Because of the current administration's changes, many of the people kept on the Mexico side of the border because of MPP are now being allowed into the U.S.

Both of those policy changes have proven controversial. The Government Accountability Office, the watchdog arm of Congress, said in March that it would examine the legality of the president's pause of border wall funding.

The attorneys general of Texas and Missouri have also sued the Biden administration over its unwinding of MPP. Those lawsuits make more traditional legal claims that the administration's decision was "arbitrary and capricious" and didn't give state governments enough notice.

Brnovich is making the more unusual argument that the administration's course change on immigration violates the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

NEPA requires that federal agencies study the impacts of their actions on the environment, whether that's funding a new highway or permitting a new power plant.

These environmental studies can be quite onerous. The average Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)—the most rigorous level of analysis required by NEPA—takes 4.5 years on average and results in reports 669 pages long on average.

NEPA also allows third parties to sue over environmental reports they feel didn't adequately examine this or that environmental impact, stretching things out even longer.

Streamlining the NEPA process was a signature goal of the Trump administration. In July 2020, it finalized a number of administrative reforms that limited what environmental impacts federal agencies would have to consider and expanded the scope of how much federal involvement was necessary to trigger NEPA requirements.

Somewhat ironically, Brnovich is now looking to expand what kinds of federal actions should be subject to NEPA in order to save several other signature Trump administration immigration policies.

"As a direct and foreseeable consequence of the gaps in the nation's border wall… migrants have been crossing the border in Arizona in greater numbers than ever before," reads Brnovich's complaint, citing the 171,000 migrants encountered by Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) on the border in March.

"Thousands of individuals have been released and are being released into Arizona as a result of the termination of this program that otherwise would never have entered the country," continues the complaint in respect to the MPP unwinding. "Despite the intent to cause this outcome, at no time did Defendants undertake any analysis of the environmental impacts on the human environment in Arizona of this additional population."

Brnovich's lawsuit asks that Biden's border wall pause and changes to MPP be overturned until a full Environmental Impact Statement is prepared on the consequences of all those migrants being allowed into his state.

Beginning in 2016, a collection of anti-immigrant groups, ranching associations, and conservation districts sued the then-Obama administration over its failure to subject its own immigration policies to NEPA review. That lawsuit was dismissed by a U.S. District Court in 2020 and is now being appealed.

The Arizona lawsuit points to a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in a NEPA case that held that an Environmental Impact Study sometimes needs to account for population growth.

Even with that decision, "it seems rather a jump to say that review is therefore needed for the whole class of government actions that invite an increase in population, whether or not directed at the development of a particular tract of land or group of tracts," says Walter Olson, a legal scholar at the Cato Institute.

"Arizona actively encourages in-migration by promoting the attractiveness of the state as a place to live and do business. Should it have to conduct an environmental impact study assessing the impact on development and limited resources before it does this?" Olson says.

In an interview with Fox and Friends, Brnovich seemed to acknowledge the trollish nature of his lawsuit, saying that NEPA "is what the left always uses to stop highway projects and airport reconstruction."

"We are saying that by stopping the wall construction they are violating NEPA by allowing more and more people coming into this country and that's having a devastating impact on our environment and it's also impacting the increase in population which will have all sorts of impacts down the road," he continued, adding that migrants crossing over the border also litter a lot.

Arizona's lawsuit is still fresh and the government has yet to respond. It will remain to be seen if a court will entertain the attorney general's novel invocation of NEPA.

Legal merits aside, it is deeply concerning that some elected officials think we should be treating individual humans as pollutants by virtue of them coming from another country.

NEXT: A Defense Witness Says the Cops Who Pinned George Floyd to the Pavement Were Not Using Force

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich Sues Biden Administration for Not Studying the Environmental Impact of More Migrants Coming Into the U.S.

    Given the rules the Democrats set out on this subject, this is a perfectly reasonable lawsuit.

    1. Yeah, even if Brnovich is advancing it dishonestly, the only way you disregard it is to openly state that either immigration or AGW arguments (or both) have no merit. Relative to Russian collusion and sexual assalt interroviews, this is above aboard.

      1. USA Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than dd regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..VISIT HERE

    2. Agree with this. The tact to delay a lot of construction.

    3. LIFE CHANGING OPPORTUNITY BE an Internet HOME-BASED real Earner.I am just working on facebook only 3 to 4 hours a Day and earning £47786 a month vghgyu easily, that is handsome earning to meet my extra expenses and that is really life changing opportunity. Let me give you a little insight into what I do….. Visit Here

    4. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple works from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and bhjgj its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

    5. Change Your Life Right Now! Work From Comfort Of Your Home And Receive Your First Paycheck Within A Week. No Experience Needed, No Boss Over YourBVG Shoulder… Say Goodbye To Your Old Job! Limited Number Of Spots Open… Find out how HERE……. Visit Here

  2. Libertarians are so wishy washy.

  3. This is funny shit.

  4. Strategically, this is a sharp move. Brnovich opposes both Biden’s immigration policy and the abuse of environmental review laws. By pitting them against one another, he’s sure to win. Either the immigration change is overturned or he gets a strong precedent weakening the ability to use environmental review laws to block policy decisions.

    1. Or we allow the inconsistency to ride along, ignored, and the environmental review process, like so many other similar processes, maintains a political constituency and has nothing to do with being fairly and evenly applied.

      1. In other words, environmental reviews become formally recognized as the vaunted superprecedent.

        1. We’re seeing a modern day School House Rock in real time, how a bureaucratic process becomes super-Constitutional law.

          1. I’m just a bill, yes, I’m only a bill, and I can’t get up to capital hill. (The new fencing and all)

    2. I agree with both you and Diane. It is a politically sharp move that points out the hypocrisy in the system, but there is no way anything will come out of it because humans are great at coming up with reasons that 2 + 2 = 17.

    3. Having treasured my ignorance of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, is there a government out clause in either? Beyond claiming that, ‘It’s a national security issue, so get fucked?’

  5. Environmental impact studies are infrastructure!

    There. Now the politicians on both sides will be happy.

  6. “A signature priority of President Donald Trump’s administration was paring back federal environmental laws. Republicans are now stretching the definition of those same laws to save the former president’s immigration policies.”

    I’m sure Britschgi’s primary concern here is highlighting the supposed hypocrisy of politicians. How would we know about it otherwise? And I’m sure he’s terribly disappointed that Republicans are failing to live up to Trump’s standards. I bet he’s losing sleep over it and everything!

  7. Even a cursory look at world population will make anyone realize that there are a whole lot of people who want to come to the US and have the means to get here. The only limiting factors are immigration policy and the ability to move large numbers of people over distance. Either we slow it down at the border – not the same as stopping all immigration – or they will stop coming when it no longer looks like a place anyone would take the trouble to go to.

  8. Why all of the gamesmanship and word games?

    Biden explicitly encourages and enacts policies to enable illegal immigration.

    This isn’t about migrants. It isn’t about immigration. It is about allowing huge numbers of illegal immigrants in. On purpose.

    They could easily change immigration quotas. Or eliminate them. But nobody even suggests that.

    One has to wonder why? Why have tens of millions of people who are not legally allowed to work?

    1. To lower wages, depress citizen participation in the workforce (and conversely promote citizen advocacy for UBCs), oh…and to vote for all of the above. Though we pinky-swear they won’t.

  9. Isn’t this the jackass behind the backpage case where his wife is the judge?

  10. Live by the sword – then don’t be surprised when others take up that sword to oppose you.

    Sauce for the goose and all that.

  11. ladies newcastle is a wonderful place to make contact with hot girls in United Kingdom

  12. “anti-immigrant conservatives.”, sure, sure, “anti-USA-invasion conservatives” is the non-propaganda language.

  13. Why not? Most ‘environmental reviews’ are about grabbing power and have little or nothing to do with Teh Envirement. They are the favored tool of homeowners who don’t want new construction. They are used by zillionaires to keep people away from ‘their’ beaches. They are a useful means to lower the standard of living for the proles (thanks, Bill Gates and Al Gore). Why not put them to a useful purpose, for once?

  14. Why do they want a flood of illegal immigrants? Duh… It serves the Democrat purpose to crush their infidels, i.e. the evil conservatives, aka the average decent, responsible, thinking, productive citizen. They may have already delivered the coup de grace with the HUGE spending pander bills wit even more to come. Inflation will crush the financial security these people earned during the lifetime – they too will become dependent on government handouts – well if they behave properly. I think it’s time to dim the lights – the party’s over.

  15. “Migrants … actions also directly result in the release of pollutants, carbon dioxide, and other greenhouse gases”.

    How to understand this? As long as migrants fart in Mexico it’s OK, but if the fart in Arizona it contributes to global warming?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.