The Claim

Immediately resumed construction of the border wall — with dozens of miles of new construction underway or already completed, including new border barrier projects underway in El Paso and the Rio Grande Valley — to safeguard the homeland against future invasion.

The Claim, Unpacked

What is literally being asserted?

Three assertions: (1) That wall construction was “immediately resumed”; (2) that “dozens of miles” of new construction are underway or completed, with specific projects in El Paso and the Rio Grande Valley; and (3) that the wall’s purpose is to “safeguard the homeland against future invasion.”

What is being implied but not asserted?

That construction began on Day One. That “dozens of miles” have been built, rather than merely contracted or planned. That these are entirely new projects initiated by this administration, rather than reactivations of pre-existing contracts from Trump’s first term or continuations of segments Biden had authorized. That the border wall is an effective tool against the specific crossing patterns currently observed. That the scale of construction is large relative to the 1,954-mile border. That immigration constitutes an “invasion” warranting a wall as a military defensive structure.

What is conspicuously absent?

Any acknowledgment that the earliest construction activity used pre-existing contracts and funding from Trump’s first term (2018 and 2020 appropriations), not new contracts. Any distinction between miles contracted, miles under construction, and miles completed. Any mention that as of February 2026, CBP’s own Smart Wall Map showed only 16.4 miles of new primary wall and 4.1 miles of replacement wall completed. Any reference to the Biden administration’s own wall construction (20 miles in Starr County, gap filling near Yuma). Any discussion of cost per mile or the $46.5 billion price tag. Any evidence that wall construction at these specific locations addresses current crossing patterns, which have shifted away from walled areas. Any acknowledgment that the first new contract of Trump’s second term was not awarded until March 15, 2025 — nearly two months after the “immediate” executive order.

Evidence Assessment

Established Facts

The executive order directing wall construction was signed on Day One, but physical construction did not “immediately” resume. President Trump signed Proclamation 10886 on January 20, 2025, declaring a national emergency and directing the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security to “immediately take all appropriate action… to construct additional physical barriers along the southern border.” The earliest physical construction activity occurred January 22, 2025 (San Ysidro, California) and January 31, 2025 (El Paso, Texas) — but both used pre-existing contracts and pre-existing funding from Trump’s first term (2018 and 2020 appropriations held by Fisher Sand & Gravel). The first new contract of Trump’s second term was not awarded until March 15, 2025, to Granite Construction Co. for seven miles in Hidalgo County, Texas ($70.2 million using FY2021 funds). [^012-a1]

As of February 11, 2026, CBP’s own Smart Wall Map showed 25.7 miles of barriers completed since January 20, 2025 — not “dozens of miles.” The breakdown: 16.4 miles of new primary wall, 4.1 miles of replacement wall, 4.6 miles of secondary wall, and 0.6 miles of waterborne barriers. An additional 72.3 miles were under construction. The claim’s phrase “dozens of miles of new construction underway or already completed” is technically defensible only if you combine completed (25.7 miles) with under-construction (72.3 miles) to reach roughly 98 miles — but collapsing these categories conflates projects where steel is in the ground with projects where a contract has been signed but construction may have barely started. [^012-a2]

Construction is underway in El Paso and the Rio Grande Valley — this part of the claim is verified. CBP awarded three El Paso sector projects totaling $1.58 billion for approximately 72 miles of barriers and 149 miles of technology systems. In the RGV, the first contract (Granite Construction, 7 miles, Hidalgo County) was awarded in March 2025, with a $96.2 million waterborne barrier project (17 miles near Brownsville) also awarded. These projects are confirmed by CBP press releases and independent reporting. [^012-a3]

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (signed July 4, 2025) provided $46.5 billion for “Smart Wall” construction — the largest border wall appropriation in U.S. history. CBP placed $11.4 billion on contract by January 2026, with 587 miles of border barrier contracts awarded. Major contract rounds: $4.5 billion in September 2025 (covering 230 miles of barriers plus 400 miles of technology) and $3.3 billion in December 2025 (97 miles of primary wall, 19 miles of secondary wall, 66 miles of waterborne barriers). [^012-a4]

Biden also built wall segments — a fact the claim omits to construct a narrative of total reversal. In October 2023, the Biden administration waived 26 federal laws to authorize approximately 20 miles of new barriers in Starr County, Texas (RGV Sector). In July 2022, Biden authorized filling four wide gaps near Yuma, Arizona. Biden stated he was legally required to spend the appropriated funds under the Impoundment Control Act: “there’s nothing under the law other than they have to use the money for what it was appropriated.” Some of the “gaps” Trump’s second-term projects now fill are gaps that existed because Biden’s construction was itself incomplete. [^012-a5]

Strong Inferences

The earliest construction activity was reactivation of paused Trump-era projects, not initiation of new ones. The January 22 (San Ysidro) and January 31 (El Paso) construction used 2018 and 2020 appropriations and contracts already held by Fisher Sand & Gravel. The Biden administration had confirmed in 2023 that these funds would be used for wall construction but had not started the work. This means the “immediate resumption” was more accurately the unpausing of projects that were designed, funded, and contracted years earlier. The executive order created the political directive; the operational capacity was already in place. [^012-a6]

“Dozens of miles” blurs the critical distinction between contracted, under construction, and completed. CBP’s own data (February 2026) shows a clear hierarchy: 587 miles contracted, 72.3 miles under construction, 25.7 miles completed. The claim says “underway or already completed,” which technically encompasses both categories, but the natural reading of “dozens of miles of new construction” implies physical wall standing — and the completed mileage was 25.7, barely into “dozens” territory (where “dozens” means at least 24). The construction pipeline is large; the completed wall as of the claim’s publication date was modest. [^012-a7]

Cost per mile has escalated dramatically from historical norms. The Granite Construction contract works out to approximately $10 million per mile. Fisher Sand & Gravel’s Arizona contract: approximately $11.4 million per mile. The El Paso 3 project (BCCG): approximately $17.7 million per mile. For context, the 2007-2015 Secure Fence Act construction cost approximately $3.7 million per mile for 653 miles. Trump’s first-term wall averaged $20 million per mile. The second-term Smart Wall system — integrating technology, roads, and secondary barriers — pushes per-mile costs even higher when support contracts are included. ProPublica documented $2.9 billion in contract modifications (25% of all awarded funds) during the first term, with the DHS Inspector General reporting the agency “has not fully demonstrated” capability to manage large-scale acquisitions responsibly. [^012-a8]

Wall construction at currently walled locations addresses yesterday’s crossing patterns, not today’s. Academic research consistently finds that border barriers produce a “displacement effect” — crossings shift to unwalled segments rather than ceasing. When San Diego was fenced in the 1990s, arrests in San Diego declined but increased nearly 600% in Arizona. The same dynamic applies now: with crossings already at 55-year lows (see Item #6), the remaining unauthorized crossings increasingly occur in remote, difficult terrain where walls are hardest to build and most environmentally destructive. The massive investment in wall infrastructure addresses a problem that enforcement, policy, and Mexican cooperation have already reduced by 87% from the four-year average. [^012-a9]

Informed Speculation

The $46.5 billion Smart Wall program is the largest infrastructure benefit to specific contractors in border security history — the follow-the-money question matters. The same contractors who dominated Trump’s first-term wall construction reappear: Fisher Sand & Gravel received contracts totaling over $2 billion across both terms. SLSCO received approximately $2.2 billion. BCCG Joint Venture received five contracts worth $3 billion in September 2025 alone. AIS Infrastructure announced a $2 billion package in December 2025. During the first term, 88% of border wall contracts went to four companies, and GAO faulted the Army Corps of Engineers for awarding work “without full and open competition.” Whether the second term’s contracting practices represent improved procurement or continued patterns of consolidation deserves ongoing scrutiny.

The land seizure dimension is also significant. During Trump’s first term, DHS filed more than 360 eminent domain lawsuits involving thousands of acres in border states. Property seizures in South Texas took 21-30 months. In the Rio Grande Valley specifically, wall construction threatens Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge, Bentsen-Rio Grande Valley State Park, and the historic La Lomita Chapel (1899, listed on the National Register). DHS has waived environmental and historical preservation laws to accelerate construction. Nature tourism in the Valley generates $463 million annually from half a million visitors.

Structural Analysis

The attribution problem — “immediately resumed” vs. actual timeline: The executive order was signed Day One. Physical construction at pre-existing project sites began within days (using pre-existing contracts and funding). The first new contract was awarded nearly two months later (March 15). Major funding was not available until July 4 (OBBB Act). Significant contract awards came in September-December 2025. As of February 2026, 25.7 miles were complete. The word “immediately” is doing a lot of work — it is accurate for the directive but misleading for the operational reality of wall construction, which requires environmental reviews (or waivers of them), contract awards, land acquisition, and engineering before steel goes in the ground.

Announced vs. outcome — the mileage gap: The claim says “dozens of miles.” CBP’s tracker shows 25.7 miles completed and 72.3 under construction. The contracted pipeline is 587 miles. The end-state target is over 1,400 miles of new primary wall. The administration is in the early stages of the largest border infrastructure program ever attempted, but the claim, published January 20, 2026, presents a work-in-progress as an achievement. It is more accurate to say the administration has initiated an enormous construction program than that it has built “dozens of miles.”

Follow the money: The $46.5 billion OBBB allocation is the dominant fact. This dwarfs all prior border wall spending combined (roughly $15 billion across all administrations through Trump’s first term). The same contractors who received billions in the first term — and whose contracts were documented by ProPublica as escalating well beyond initial awards — are receiving billions more. Fisher Sand & Gravel alone has received contracts across multiple sectors totaling several billion dollars across both terms. Environmental law waivers eliminate review mechanisms that might otherwise flag cost or scope concerns.

The denominator problem — wall miles vs. border miles: The U.S.-Mexico border is 1,954 miles. Before January 20, 2025, approximately 644 miles of primary wall and 75 miles of secondary wall existed. Even if every contracted mile is built, the border will not be fully walled — 535 miles will receive only detection technology due to terrain. The claim’s “dozens of miles” is a fraction of a fraction of the total border.

“Invasion” language — same pattern as Items #6, #10, #11: The claim again uses “invasion” to describe immigration. As documented in Item #6, legal scholars and courts have uniformly rejected the immigration-as-invasion characterization. The Alien Enemies Act defines invasion as requiring military attack. No court has accepted this framing.

Context the Framing Omits

Biden built wall too. The Biden administration authorized approximately 20 miles of new barriers in Starr County (RGV Sector) and gap-filling near Yuma, despite Biden’s stated opposition to walls. Some of Trump’s second-term projects fill gaps in these same corridors.

The earliest “resumed” construction used old contracts and old money. The January 2025 construction near San Ysidro and El Paso used 2018 and 2020 appropriations and Fisher Sand & Gravel contracts from Trump’s first term. These were unpaused projects, not new initiatives.

Only 25.7 miles completed as of February 2026. CBP’s own Smart Wall Map shows total completed barriers at 25.7 miles across all categories. The bulk of the 587 contracted miles are in planning or early award stages.

Wall effectiveness is contested by academic research. The Migration Policy Institute, the CGO, and multiple academic studies document the “displacement effect” — walls redirect crossings to unwalled areas rather than preventing them. The San Diego fencing case study showed a 600% increase in Arizona crossings when San Diego was fenced. With crossings at 55-year lows already, the incremental security value of additional wall miles is debatable.

The cost is enormous. At $46.5 billion for the Smart Wall program, the per-mile cost of new construction ranges from $10-25 million. Historical border fencing (2007-2015) cost roughly $3.7 million per mile. The Trump-era wall costs approximately 5x more per mile than previous generations of barrier construction.

Environmental and property costs are real. DHS has waived environmental laws to accelerate construction. In the RGV, construction threatens wildlife refuges, state parks, and a historic chapel. Eminent domain proceedings against private landowners in South Texas take 21-30 months and generate significant community opposition.

Construction was not immediate — it took months to ramp up. The executive order was Day One. The first new contract was March 15. Major funding arrived July 4. Significant contracts were September-December 2025. The construction pipeline was barely operational for the first several months.

Verdict

Factual core: Misleading. The claim contains verifiable elements — the executive order was signed Day One, wall construction is underway in El Paso and the RGV, and “dozens of miles” of combined completed-and-under-construction barriers can be counted (25.7 completed + 72.3 under construction = ~98 miles as of February 2026). But the framing is misleading in three critical ways. First, “immediately resumed” conflates the signing of a directive with the operational reality: the earliest construction used pre-existing contracts and funding, the first new contract came nearly two months later, and major funding did not arrive until July. Second, “dozens of miles of new construction” blurs the distinction between contracted (587 miles), under construction (72.3 miles), and completed (25.7 miles) — the natural reading implies far more physical wall than actually exists. Third, the claim omits that Biden also built wall in the same sectors, that construction costs have escalated dramatically, and that academic research consistently shows walls displace crossings rather than eliminating them.

Framing as “win”: Partially supported but overstated. The administration has launched the largest border wall construction program in history ($46.5 billion), awarded 587 miles of contracts, and begun physical construction in multiple sectors. These are real actions. But the January 2026 claim overstates what had actually been built by that date, uses “immediately” in a way that obscures the multi-month ramp-up, and presents construction as “safeguarding against invasion” without evidence that wall construction addresses current crossing patterns or that immigration constitutes an invasion.

What a reader should understand: Wall construction did resume under Trump’s second term — that is real. But the timeline, scale, and context are all materially different from what the claim implies. The executive order was Day One; the first new contract came two months later; major funding arrived six months later; and as of February 2026, 25.7 miles of physical barriers had been completed out of 587 miles contracted. The earliest construction used pre-existing Trump-era contracts, not new ones. Biden also built wall in the same region, a fact the claim erases. The $46.5 billion program is genuinely historic in scale — but so is the cost, which runs $10-25 million per mile compared to $3.7 million per mile for the 2007-2015 fencing. And the fundamental question — whether additional wall miles improve border security when crossings are already at 55-year lows and academic research consistently shows walls displace rather than deter crossings — goes entirely unaddressed.

Cross-References

• Item #6: “Lowest border crossings since the 1970s” — if crossings are at 55-year lows, the marginal security value of additional wall miles at $10-25M each is debatable
• Item #10: “Declared a national border emergency on Day One” — the emergency declaration is the legal foundation for wall construction authority under Section 2808
• Item #11: “Deployed National Guard and active-duty military” — military personnel deployed to border have assisted with wall construction

Sources

U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “Smart Wall Map.” Updated February 11, 2026. https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/along-us-borders/smart-wall-map

U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “Smart Wall Frequently Asked Questions.” 2025. https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/along-us-borders/smart-wall-map/faqs

U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “CBP Awards First Border Wall Contract of President Trump’s Second Term.” March 15, 2025. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-awards-first-border-wall-contract-president-trumps-second-term

U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “DHS, CBP Award $4.5B in New Contracts Under OBBB for Smart Wall Construction Along Southwest Border.” September 30, 2025. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/dhs-cbp-award-45b-new-contracts-under-obbb-smart-wall-construction

U.S. Customs and Border Protection. “DHS, CBP Continue to Strengthen Border Security with Five New Smart Wall Contracts in Texas and Arizona.” December 16, 2025. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/dhs-cbp-continue-strengthen-border-security-five-new-smart-wall

The White House. “Declaring a National Emergency at the Southern Border of the United States.” January 20, 2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/declaring-a-national-emergency-at-the-southern-border-of-the-united-states/

House Committee on Homeland Security. “BORDER BRIEF: The Trump Administration Positions Our Borders to Be More Secure Than Ever in 2026.” January 24, 2026. https://homeland.house.gov/2026/01/24/border-brief-the-trump-administration-positions-our-borders-to-be-more-secure-than-ever-in-2026/

Engineering News-Record. “Border Wall Construction Restarts in California and Texas.” February 3, 2025. https://www.enr.com/articles/60254-border-wall-construction-restarts-in-california-and-texas

Engineering News-Record. “Border Wall Contractor Says $2B Federal Award Package Sets Stage for 2026 Construction.” December 16, 2025. https://www.enr.com/articles/62240-border-wall-contractor-says-2b-federal-award-package-sets-stage-for-2026-construction

PolitiFact. “Finish the Border Wall: Trump Makes Progress on Border Wall with Projects to Add Over 80 Miles of New Barriers.” 2025. https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/maga-meter-tracking-donald-trumps-2024-promises/promise/1618/finish-the-border-wall/article/3185/

ProPublica. “Records Show Trump’s Border Wall Is Costing Taxpayers Billions More Than Initial Contracts.” October 28, 2020. https://www.propublica.org/article/records-show-trumps-border-wall-is-costing-taxpayers-billions-more-than-initial-contracts

FactCheck.org. “Biden’s Border Wall, Explained.” October 6, 2023. https://www.factcheck.org/2023/10/bidens-border-wall-explained/

CBS News. “New Report Details Trump Effort to Seize Thousands of Acres of Private Land for Border Wall.” September 15, 2025. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-border-wall-plans-private-land-seizure/

Inside Climate News. “Rio Grande Valley Advocates Urge Congress to Restore Protections for Public Lands in Path of Border Wall.” February 4, 2026. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/04022026/rio-grande-valley-border-wall-public-lands/

Just Security. “Immigration Is Not an ‘Invasion’ under the Constitution.” 2023. https://www.justsecurity.org/91543/immigration-is-not-an-invasion-under-the-constitution/