DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Build That Wall

Sounds like a good campaign slogan for Sleepy Joe. The same thing being 'nothing'.

So you win with "Biden's forklift"?

You seem to be angry about how easily I've shown they can crawl under that razor wire. It seems to blow your entire theory. Others might consider that a learning experience.

Or you could vote for a man that could be the author of the criminal playbook. Stop pretending there's a good option here and that somehow Biden is worse than the opposing candidate they're about to order up. It makes you appear to be foolish.

...Trump write a book? Maybe he could color in pictures in a children's book. Of course, even then I doubt he could stay within the lines.

And you seem to ignore the video. The border patrol agent standing, and all of the cop/border patrol vehicles there. Detaining them.

He lives in his own special little world of make believe. Out of the mold of "if I repeat the same bs enough people will believe it"... only nobody does.

By tomorrow it will be Greg Abbott stole the "industrial strength" forklift from Oprah and Don Knotts raised the fence in a PR move.


Whoah.... after being brainwashed by Trump (almost forgot the Trump!!)

There's an article in the most recent Reader's Digest about how to deal with certain people. One of the types of people is the "contrarion". It describes pit to a tee.

Don’t look now, but here comes Joe and his forklift. Lol

So now your complaint is that they're detaining them? I thought that was their job?

Does it talk about what type of person makes baseless claims and just follows along with anything they want to believe? Most call those blind followers. Which is pretty much all you do. You wait for someone else to attempt asserting stupid claims and then afterwords come along and pull up the rear, which seems to be quite a comfortable position for you, like the mob mentality your kind is known for. Luckily for me you just happen to suck at it.

There I fixed it for you. Nobody in their right mind believes Biden sent a forklift to raise wire at the border except for dimwitted followers.

Dawgtalkers. Where naivete turns to brazen, blindfolded stupidity.

Recognizing you have a problem is half the battle. Good luck with the other half.

lwl?

Awe, now you're pulling up the rear with arch's lame ass BS. Stop blaming me because you're a quitter.



But it's nice to see you've come to the realization of just how stupid "Biden's forklift" sounds. On one hand you state a fact that there have been BP agents that have cut the wire. Then you claimed they sent a forklift to do that job.

I thought you could read? I changed my mind. Oprah sent the forklift.

That makes about as much sense as Biden sending it. At least you're consistent with your absurdity.

Biden Deploys Bulldozer To Lift Border Fence, Letting Illegals In

ByTruth PressPublished5 days ago


Cameras captured the moment Border Patrol used heavy machinery to raise concertina wire erected by Texas authorities – just as a group of more than 300 illegal aliens ‘coincidentally’ arrived in the area and stormed the river bank at Eagle Pass, TX, Border Hawk reported.

“This huge caravan of around 300 migrants crossed into Eagle Pass thanks to Border Patrol lifting the barbed wire. Hundreds of migrants crossed in a few minutes,” Border Hawk correspondent Efraín González reports.

“Somehow, these large groups of migrants are informed about the place and time when the forklifts raise the barbed wire to cross in groups.”

Following last month’s historic invasion of Eagle Pass, Texas, the number of migrants arriving by train is climbing again in Piedras Negras, Mexico.

Last month, large groups of migrants, mostly from Venezuela, have been wading across the Rio Grande river near a railroad bridge in Eagle Pass, Texas, undeterred by coils of razor wire laid along the banks.

Reuters witnessed migrants crossing, sometimes dozens at a time and at times with small children, navigating strong currents to then make their way through the sharp wire put up by the Texas national guard. Once on U.S. soil they waited in the hot sun to turn themselves in to U.S. border officials for processing.

Under a new rule put in place in May by the administration of President Joe Biden, migrants who have not sought an appointment to cross at a legal port of entry on a government-run cellphone app known as CBP One can face a higher bar to asylum and potentially swift deportation.

Migrant numbers had initially plummeted after the announcement, but in recent weeks began rising again as thousands of migrants – many fleeing Venezuela – making their way through south and central America began arriving at the border.

The upswing in arrivals has generated a new wave of political attacks on Biden, who is running for re-election next year. Former President Donald Trump, who made hardline immigration policy central to his term in office, is leading in Republican polls as a likely challenger to Biden in 2024.

Texas Republican Governor Greg Abbott has repeatedly blasted Biden, a Democrat, for not doing enough to curb illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border, with numbers of migrant crossings on pace to approach record highs in September.

Texas authorities placed massive floating buoys in the middle of the Rio Grande in an attempt to deter migrants, but earlier this month a U.S. federal judge ordered the state to remove them to the embankment. Texas is appealing the ruling.

Abbott says small border towns have been overwhelmed and criticized Border Patrol agents on social media on Sept. 20 for cutting down wire installed by the state.

“The concertina wire and other structures that have been placed along the border are to deter these dangerous and illegal crossings,” Texas Department of Public Safety Press Secretary Ericka Miller said.

A spokesman for U.S. Customs and Border Protection noted that once migrants cross the river they are on U.S. soil. The Border Patrol has the right to remove or alter obstacles in order to be able to safely take migrants into custody, the agency has said.

“If they start getting swept away by the currents, if they start succumbing to the environment, the extreme temperatures, the humidity you all feel right now, and my men and women see that, they are not going to let somebody die or get into harm’s way,” Border Patrol Chief Jason Owens said in a statement to reporters in Eagle Pass on Tuesday.

Earlier this month nine migrants died as they were trying to cross the river into Eagle Pass.

Neither the physical barriers put up by Texas nor the Biden administration message that crossing illegally could have tougher immigration consequences have apparently deterred the hundreds of migrants crossing into Eagle Pass from the Mexican border city of Piedras Negras. Many arrive following a long journey on top of cargo trains.

The arrival of groups of migrants throughout the week also comes despite efforts by Mexican authorities to stop them from traveling north across the country.

The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to requests for comments on the crossings in Eagle Pass. Mexican immigration officials did not respond to a request for comment.

“We want a better future for our families,” Venezuelan migrant Johendry Chourio said on Thursday after arriving in Piedras Negras by train. “We want to get ahead and we’re eager to work.”

https://truthpress.com/news/biden-deploys-bulldozer-to-lift-border-fence-letting-illegals-in/

From your source....








It seems they can't even tell the difference between a bulldozer and a forklift. Yeah, that's some real reliable journalism you have there.

Once again zero evidence that the forklift was supplied or operated by the border patrol. #sheeple

Yep. No DNA evidence.

Everyone is lying, including federal judges and Texas law enforcement.

If you want the real story, talk to Pit on Dawgtalkers.

Everyone is saying? Who are you claiming "everyone to be"? that's the same incoherent rambling we heard about the election being stolen. "People are saying.... A lot of people are saying.... Everyone is saying" So the election was stolen too, right? Because, I mean "everybody is saying".... lmao

You can stop making excuses for lame ass sources any time now. Not only don't you have DNA evidence, the only evidence you have is that a forklift was there. That's not really a threshold that constitutes evidence.

And if they want the real story, they certainly can't talk to you.

These people are lying... sworn statements in a lawsuit against the federal government. Their pictures and videos are lying too, uh... because Trump!

Who cares about federal perjury charges when you can create the strange illusion that Pit from Dawgtalkers has no idea what he's talking about??





IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DEL RIO DIVISION
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY, ALEJANDRO
MAYORKAS, in his official capacity as
Secretary of the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, U.S. CUSTOMS &
BORDER PROTECTION, U.S.
BORDER PATROL, TROY A.
MILLER, in his official capacity as
Acting Commissioner for U.S.
Customers & Border Protection, JASON
OWENS, in his official capacity as Chief
of the U.S. Border Patrol, and JUAN
BERNAL, in his official capacity as
Acting Chief Patrol Agent, Del Rio
Sector U.S. Border Patrol
Defendants.
§
§
§
§


Civil Action No. DR-23-CV-00055-AM
ORDER
Pending before the Court is the State of Texas’s (“the Plaintiff”) Emergency Motion for a
Temporary Restraining Order or Stay of Agency Action (“the Motion”) against the United States
Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”); Alejandro Mayorkas, in his official capacity as
Secretary of DHS (“Mayorkas”); United States Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”); United
States Border Patrol (“BP”); Troy A. Miller, in his official capacity as Acting Commissioner for
CBP (“Miller”); Jason Owens, in his official capacity as Chief of BP (“Owens”); and Juan Bernal,
in his official capacity as Acting Chief Patrol Agent of the Del Rio Sector of BP (“Bernal”)
(collectively, “the Defendants”). (ECF No. 5.) As explained below, the Court GRANTS the
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 1 of 11
2
Motion for a temporary restraining order until the parties have an opportunity to present evidence
at a preliminary injunction hearing before the Court.
II. BACKGROUND
On October 24, 2023, the Plaintiff commenced this civil action against the Defendants
when it filed a Complaint. (ECF No. 1.) According to the Plaintiff, this lawsuit was filed because
federal officials are allegedly destroying the Plaintiff’s property by cutting the Plaintiff’s
concertina wire located near the United States-Mexico border. (ECF No. 5 at 2; ECF No 5-1.)
The Plaintiff believes that this property destruction is intended to allow migrants to enter the
country. (ECF No. 5 at 2.)
The Plaintiff contends that since September 20, 2023, this property destruction has
accelerated. (ECF No. 5 at 2.) Pictures, video, and declarations from various officials associated
with the Plaintiff detail specific instances when the federal government allegedly damaged the
Plaintiff’s property and consequently allowed migrants to enter. (See, e.g., ECF No. 5-1.) The
Plaintiff raises numerous claims against the Defendants, including common law conversion,
common law trespass to chattels, and Administrative Procedure Act violations. (ECF No. 1 at 23-
28.) The Plaintiff also seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining the Defendants
from interfering with the Plaintiff’s property; a stay of agency action; a declaration that
Defendant’s actions are unlawful; and costs. (Id. at 28-29.)
In the Complaint and some documents filed with the Court, the Plaintiff establishes that
the wire barrier is on private property with the permission of the owners and/or municipal
authority. (ECF No. 1 at ¶¶ 5, 11, 59; ECF No. 3-2 at 9.) Documents executed between the
Plaintiff and the landowners provide the Plaintiff with a basis for its presence on the border
properties. (ECF No. 3-2 at 9.)
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 2 of 11
3
On October 24, 2023, the Plaintiff filed an unopposed motion for leave to exceed the page
limits for its motion for a preliminary injunction, along with the preliminary injunction motion.
(ECF No. 3.) On October 27, 2023, the Plaintiff filed the instant Motion. (ECF No. 5.) On
October 28, 2023, the Plaintiff filed the declaration of another individual associated with the
Plaintiff concerning the Defendants allegedly damaging more concertina wires. (ECF No. 8-1.)
III. STANDARD OF REVIEW
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b) states that a court may issue a temporary restraining
order without notice to the adverse party only if the “specific facts in an affidavit or a verified
complaint clearly show that immediate or irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the
movant before the adverse party can be heard in opposition” and “the movant’s attorney certifies
in writing any efforts made to give notice and the reasons why it should not be required.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 65(b).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 continues:
Every temporary restraining order issued without notice must state
the date and hour it was issued; describe the injury and state why it
is irreparable; state why the order was issued without notice; and be
promptly filed in the clerk’s office and entered in the record. The
order expires at the time after entry – not to exceed 14 days – that
the court sets, unless before that time the court, for good cause,
extends it for a like period or the adverse party consents to a longer
extension. The reasons for an extension must be entered in the
record. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2) (cleaned up); see also Pomeroy,
Inc. v. Norder Opportunity Saver Sys., Inc., 2010 WL 11652127, at
*4 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 23, 2010).
If the Court issues a temporary restraining order, the nonmovants must receive seven days’ notice
before the preliminary injunction hearing is held. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(c).
To succeed on a motion for a temporary restraining order, the movant must establish four
elements: (1) “a substantial likelihood that the movant will prevail on the merits”; (2) “a substantial
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 3 of 11
4
threat that irreparable harm will result if the injunction is not granted”; (3) “the threatened injury
outweighs the threatened harm to the defendant”; and (4) the injunction “will not disserve the
public interest.” Clark v. Pichard, 812 F.2d 991, 993 (5th Cir. 1987) (citation omitted). Elements
three and four merge “when the Government is the opposing party.” Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S.
418, 435-36 (2009). The decision whether to grant a temporary restraining order “is within the
sound discretion of the district court.” Rockwell, 2019 WL 2745754, at *2 (citing Miss. Power &
Light Co. v. United Gas Pipe Line Co., 760 F.2d 618, 621 (5th Cir. 1985)). Emergency injunctive
relief is an extraordinary remedy that should not be granted when the evidence supporting it fails
to support such a finding. See Clark, 812 F.2d at 993 (citations omitted).
IV. ANALYSIS
The Plaintiff requests “an order temporarily restraining Defendants from damaging,
destroying, or otherwise interfering with Texas’s concertina wire fence while” the preliminary
injunction motion remains pending. (ECF No. 5 at 8.) The Court shall grant the temporary relief
requested, with one important exception for any medical emergency that mostly likely results in
serious bodily injury or death to a person, absent any boats or other life-saving apparatus available
to avoid such medical emergencies prior to reaching the concertina wire barrier.
A. Likelihood of Success on the Merits
The Plaintiff argues that it is likely to succeed on its common law trespass to chattels claim
because “[1] the concertina wire is state property; [2] Defendants have exercised dominion over
that property absent any kind of exigency; and [3] they have continued to do so even after being
put on notice of [the Plaintiff’s] interest in the property.” (ECF No. 5 at 5.)
Failure to prove a claim “with certainty . . . does not foreclose” a temporary restraining
order. Texas v. Seatrain Int’l, S. A., 518 F.2d 175, 180 (5th Cir. 1975). “To assess the likelihood
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 4 of 11
5
of success on the merits, we look to standards provided by the substantive law.” Janvey v. Alguire,
647 F.3d 585, 596 (5th Cir. 2011) (quotation marks and citation omitted). Under Texas common
law, a trespass to chattels is “an injury to, or interference with, possession, unlawfully, with or
without the exercise of physical force.” Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Vowell Constr. Co.,
341 S.W.2d 148, 149-50 (Tex. 1960) (citation and quotation marks omitted) (affirming a judgment
finding a trespass to chattels where a construction company severed another company’s
communications cable); see also Omnibus Int’l, Inc. v. AT & T, Inc., 111 S.W.3d 818, 826 (Tex.
App. - Dallas 2003) (stating that trespass to chattels applies to use or possession). “For liability to
attach, causing actual damage to the property or depriving the owner of its use for a substantial
period must accompany the wrongful interference.” Omnibus Int’l, Inc., 111 S.W.3d at 826 (citing
Zapata v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 615 S.W.2d 198, 201 (Tex. 1981)). A “great public calamity”
can justify property destruction. Steele v. City of Houston, 603 S.W.2d 786, 791 (Tex. 1980).
Here, the Plaintiff is likely to succeed on its trespass to chattels claim. First, the Plaintiff
established that it owns the concertina wires. Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co., 341 S.W.2d at 149-
50. Brian Cooney, a Texas Military Department employee, averred that he has observed Texas
Military Department officials “construct, maintain, and repair Texas’s concertina wire fence” in
the Eagle Pass, Texas area. (ECF No. 5-1, ¶¶ 1, 3; see also ECF No. 3-2 at 15, 23) (Michael Banks,
a special adviser on border matters to the Texas governor, averred that he saw federal officials on
September 20, 2023 cut “Texas’s wire.”)).1

1
Although Cooney’s declaration was one of two sworn declarations attached to the Motion (ECF
No. 5-1; ECF No. 8-1), the Plaintiff incorporates the declarations of others by referring to the
Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction. (See, e.g., ECF No. 5 at 5-6.) Moreover, although
Manuel Perez, a Texas Military Department official, submitted a declaration that supports that the
Plaintiff owns the wires (ECF No. 3-2 at 4-5), that declaration was unsworn and otherwise failed
to include a penalty of perjury statement. 28 U.S.C. § 1746. Thus, the Court will not rely on that
document.
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 5 of 11
6
Second, the Plaintiff established that the Defendants “actual[ly] damage[d]” the
concertina wires. Omnibus Int’l, Inc., 111 S.W.3d at 826. According to Cooney, a Border Patrol
agent operating a forklift on October 26, 2023, near Eagle Pass, Texas “inserted pallet forks into
the concertina wire barrier, lifted the barrier high enough to pull the fencing stakes that kept the
fence in place out of the ground, and held it suspended in the air for approximately 20 minutes,”
which created a large enough gap for migrants to pass through. (ECF No. 5-1, ¶ 7.) According to
Cooney, “[a]fter the last of the migrants passed through the concertina wire that had been raised
by . . . the forklift, the BP agent operating it lowered the wire.” (Id. ¶ 12.) But, Cooney avers, the
stakes attached to the concertina wire and that helped keep the wire situated “were not put back
into the ground” and consequently, Texas Military Department engineers must repair the
concertina wire. (Id.; see also ECF No. 3-1 at 16-18 (video posted on the website X, formerly
known as Twitter, purports to show uniformed individuals in Eagle Pass, Texas cutting concertina
wire near a river, and then pulling that wire to form an accessible opening for migrants in that
river).)2
Photos attached to Cooney’s declaration appear to confirm his observations. (ECF No.
5-1, ¶ 11; id. at 8-9, 11.) Separately, Roberto Ortiz Diaz, who is a Texas Military Department
employee, establishes that the Defendants damaged wires on October 27, 2023. (ECF No. 8-1, ¶¶
1, 6, 10-13.) The Defendants may continue to damage wires, which is especially likely because
they damaged more property a mere day after this Motion was filed. (ECF No. 5-1, ¶ 15; ECF No.
8-1; ECF No. 5; see also ECF No. 3-2 at 26.)
Third and finally, the Plaintiff established that the Defendants lacked permission to
interfere with the wires. According to Cooney, “[n]one of the federal personnel at the scene asked
2 Like the sworn declarations in the Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, the Plaintiff
incorporated by reference this video in its Motion (ECF No. 5 at 5 (citing ECF No. 3-1 at 21-28)),
which the Court viewed on the Internet.
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 6 of 11
7
for permission from me or, to my knowledge, from other [Operation Lone Star] personnel to move
the concertina wire barrier.” (ECF No. 5-1, ¶ 9.) Cooney also added that as far as he knew, the
Texas Military Department did not give permission to BP to move the wire. (Id.; see also ECF
No. 8-1, ¶ 14.) Further, no “great public calamity” is apparent on this record to justify property
destruction. Steele, 603 S.W.2d at 791. Cooney further avers that, even though BP had airboats
in the water, no migrant was “in distress while they were in the river”; no migrant “appeared to
need medical attention”; and no one at the scene called a medical team to help the migrants. (Id.
¶¶ 10-11.) Diaz also reported a similar incident. (ECF No. 8-1, ¶¶ 8, 14.) Therefore, the Plaintiff
established that it is likely to succeed on its trespass to chattels claim. The Court need not analyze
the other claims.
B. Irreparable Harm
Harm is irreparable only “if it cannot be undone through monetary remedies.” Interox Am.
v. PPG Indus., Inc., 736 F.2d 194, 202 (5th Cir. 1984). However, the Plaintiff may still establish
irreparable harm when its costs are unrecoverable due to the government’s sovereign immunity.
See Wages & White Lion Invs., L.L.C. v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin., 16 F.4th 1130, 1142 (5th Cir.
2021); see also Portée v. Morath, No. 1:23-CV-551-RP, 2023 WL 4688528, at *5 (W.D. Tex. July
21, 2023) (publication pending) (“[C]laims for money damages against state entities and officials
are generally barred by sovereign immunity, which makes Portée’s harm irreparable for purposes
of seeking preliminary injunctive relief.”).
The Plaintiff preliminarily establishes that it would face irreparable harm without a
temporary restraining order. The Plaintiff alleges that by “damaging, destroying, and exercising
dominion over state property,” the Defendants are causing the Plaintiff to incur “extensive costs.”
(ECF No. 5 at 6.) The Plaintiff also claims that the Defendants’ actions show that they intend to
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 7 of 11
8
prevent the Plaintiff from “maintaining operational control of its own property.” (Id.)
Furthermore, the Plaintiff avers that destroying the concertina wire “irreparably harms Texas
because it facilitates increased illegal entry into the State.” (Id. at 7.) Consequently, the Plaintiff
argues that it will continue to incur considerable additional expenses to expand social services,
medical care, education, and other government programs, to accommodate the influx of illegal
aliens. (Id. at 6-7.) To support this assertion, the Plaintiff provides sworn declarations from
various Texas state officials, who describe the significant annual cost of providing emergency
medical services, social services, and public education to illegal aliens. (See generally ECF No.
3-2.)
The Court is mindful, however, that the Defendants enacted an extensive scheme, which
includes immigration enforcement and the interdiction of migrants. Arizona v. United States, 567
U.S. 387, 394, 401-02 (2012). The question then becomes how much “harm” should a state bear
if the Defendants are unable to meet their obligations of securing the border and controlling the
flow of migrants into the country. The only “harm” before this Court at the moment is the cost of
the destruction of the Plaintiff’s property, which is the wire barrier.
The injuries alleged by the Plaintiff are irreparable because they undermine the Plaintiff’s
control over its property and impose costs, which sovereign immunity precludes the Plaintiff from
ever recovering. Wages & White Lion, 16 F.4th at 1140-41. A temporary restraining order can
prevent such injuries by maintaining the status quo while the parties prepare thorough arguments
on the merits of this case. Moreover, “the risk of irreparable harm to the Plaintiff is sufficient to
proceed with the temporary restraining order without first giving notice to the Defendants.”
Pomeroy, Inc., 2010 WL 11652127, at *4. Therefore, the Plaintiff established irreparable harm.
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 8 of 11
9
C. Public Interest
The Plaintiff argues that the balance of interests favors the Plaintiff for two reasons.
First, the Plaintiff asserts that its use of concertina wire deters illegal entries and activities,
including human trafficking, drug smuggling, and terrorist infiltration. (ECF No. 5 at 7-8.)
Second, the Plaintiff argues that the Defendants’ actions are unlawful, and that even if a lawful
basis exists, the Defendants must seek redress “through legal proceedings, not self-help
actions.” (Id.)
Deterring unlawful activity, including illegal entry, is in the public interest. United States
v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873, 878 (1975) (“[T]he public interest demands effective measures
to prevent the illegal entry of aliens at the Mexican border.”). Further, “[t]here is generally no
public interest in the perpetuation of unlawful agency action.’” Louisiana v. Biden, 55 F.4th 1017,
1035 (5th Cir. 2022) (quoting Texas v. Biden, 10 F.4th 538, 560 (5th Cir. 2021)). To the extent an
agency’s acts facilitate rather than prevent unlawful conduct, as the Plaintiff argues, such acts
implicate the “substantial public interest in having governmental agencies abide by the federal
laws that govern their existence and operations.” Texas v. United States, 40 F.4th 205, 229 (5th
Cir. 2022) (quoting League of Women Voters of U.S. v. Newby, 838 F.3d 1, 12 (D.C. Cir. 2016))
(quotations omitted). The Plaintiff established that the balance of interests favors granting an
injunction, but just barely.
The Court recognizes a countervailing public interest, however, in allowing BP agents to
address medical emergencies. See Croy v. United States, No. DR-22-CV-00005-AM-VRG, 2023
WL 6393888, at *14 (W.D. Tex. Oct. 2, 2023) (discussing U.S. Customs and Border Protection
policy requiring “Border Patrol Agents who encounter individuals who are injured . . . to take
immediate action to obtain medical attention for the injured party”); Carcamo-Lopez v. Does 1
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 9 of 11
10
through 20, 865 F. Supp. 2d 736, 754 (W.D. Tex. 2011). This Order therefore includes a narrow
exception to permit the Defendants to move or cut the concertina wire to aid individuals in medical
distress, as noted above.
The Court is also very aware that the Plaintiff claims to have permission to place the wire
barrier on the property or properties where the concertina wire was located before the actions of
the Defendants and its agents. The Court is also very aware that the Defendants are charged with
protecting the border and may take measures necessary to do so. The matter needed to be further
litigated at a hearing is at the intersection of: the private property rights of the persons consenting
to the placement of the concertina wire on their land, the Plaintiff’s right to assist private property
owners and avoid costs to the Plaintiff; and the Defendants’ responsibilities over national security
and border security, and its powers to effectuate its duties, up to and including the destruction of
private or state property.
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 10 of 11
11
V. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for a Temporary
Restraining Order or Stay of Agency Action (ECF No. 5) is GRANTED on October 30, 2023 at
9:30 a.m.
The temporary restraining order shall last until it expires on November 13, 2023 at 9:30
a.m., unless a further order of this Court extends the time. For purposes of this Order, the word
“property” refers to concertina wire that the Plaintiff installed at the United States- Mexico border
in Eagle Pass, Texas prior to this order.
Until November 13, 2023 at 9:30 a.m., the Defendants shall be enjoined from: (1) removing
the property from its present location for any reason other than to provide or obtain emergency
medical aid, as noted above; (2) concealing the property in any way; (3) offering the property for
sale, rent, or use to any person, business, or entity; (4) selling or otherwise transferring the property
in whole or in part; (5) encumbering the property in any way; (6) scrapping the property; (7)
disposing of the property in any way; (8) disassembling, degrading, tampering with, or
transforming the property in any way for any reason other than to provide or obtain emergency
medical as noted in this order; and (9) failing to take all steps necessary to protect the property
against damage or loss of any kind.
A preliminary injunction hearing shall be scheduled for November 7, 2023, at 2 p.m.
SIGNED and ENTERED on this 30th day of October 2023.
______________________________________
ALIA MOSES
Chief United States District Judge
Case 2:23-cv-00055-AM Document 9 Filed 10/30/23 Page 11 of 11

Yes, it's beyond possible that one man perjured himself. that never happens, right? It's beyond possible that still it's one mans word with no actual evidence to corroborate it. But please, do continue.

There's no need to continue.

Once the judge gets wind that Pit from Dawgtalkers hasn't seen the DNA, I'm sure he'll reverse his previous ruling and throw the new case right out the window.


Pit from Dawgtalkers. A voice you can trust.

FATE a voice from Dawgtalkers you can't trust. And you keep proving it.

Aw, you're so cute. Of course when ya got nothing shoot the messenger. That's what it's all boiled down to.... desperation on your part.

Pit responds, "All what people? A single agent on Abbott's payroll and some off chute web site with no visual evidence of any such claim that it was the border border patrol using a forklift? In case you missed it, that's not many people You would think that if they had cameras and a video claiming it was border patrol, there would be evidence it was border patrol instead of just some video of a forklift. But a lot of people lack common sense these days."

You keep displaying your desperation.

Can I get some Ranch on that?

I had no idea you put ranch on meat and potatoes. But to each their own.

https://truthpress.com/disclaimer/

They spread disinformation and need a disclaimer to excuse it… just saying. FauxNews-lite.

Well pit, I cannot add to the conversation about bulldozers because, in the immortal words of sgt. Schultz, “I know nothing, nothing”. But I do know this. In October we had almost a quarter million encounters at the border. That is over 240,000 encounters! In one month! Now since I know pit you are fond of pointing out that the numbers vary, that is a drop of 11% from the previous month. If my math is decent, that should mean about 270000 encounters in September. Wow!!! We are doing great bringing those encounters down aren’t we! lol. No we are not! In fact in your word, pit, it is a “disaster.

So, let’s cut the chase shall we. Let’s take it to the bottom line. The border is a disaster and it is under Biden’s watch. For three years.

Hopefully we elect and appoint some people in the near future who take border control seriously.

Let me know when someone fixes it. Anyone. You didn't elect anyone that fixed it in 2016 and nobody is running that will fix it this time. And BTW- Mexico never did pay for the wall. But please do go on.

Already been covered, your mind just did not want to accept it.

Someone who will fix it?? Shoot I would be happy if we had someone up there north of Richmond who gave a damn that it is broken, and a disaster. I laid out way back in this thread how we can control the border situation but it takes a will and desire to do it by politicians, not just us folks out here. We need people to make the hard calls and move forward on them.

Mostly we need people who believe that living in America is a privilege and that we , america should control who comes in.

So nobody on either side has made "the hard calls" then? I have no problem with controlling who comes in. I'm just tired of all the finger pointing when nobody to date has actually done what it takes to stop it. And that includes both parties. All I've heard is a bunch of hot air and playing the blame game.

Ditto, AND let me add for those GOPers who think Trump is the answer---he and his crew, those guys and gals who would fix things- several ran a scam taking money from "We Build the Wall"- Steve Bannon involved- always- follow the money. Wonder if Trump as an ex-President can pardon himself while out of office- dang, the Republicans sure can pick them- PS- soon George Santos will be available to lead the border GOP show.

Well I think it is about time we had a border update don’t you pit. A couple of months ago you declared the border a “disaster “ and it was under biden’s watch. At that time we were having 200,000 illegals coming to our border. 200,000 !! Wow that is a lot of illegals. You were right, it was a “disaster”. Today, it is a disaster on high dose steroids!! Chaos !! A nightmare for our poor border “security” men and women. In October, November and December we averaged about 275,000 encounters and in December we actually broke the 300,000 illegal encounters. Man that makes Biden’s 200,000 per month look efficient. I’m not sure what that makes trump’s performance though because he averaged about 40,000 per month. No I did not forget a zero, it was 40,000. Now I am not gonna go back and check all old data, but I think it is safe to say that Joe Biden has done the worst job in history of protecting America’s border. The worst!

There are a couple of notions you lefties insist on throwing out that are bogus. First that nobody in Washington wants to do anything about the border. Not true. Trump’s mindset from the beginning was to bring illegal immigration under control. Did he accomplish everything he wanted?? Not even close. He had to fight the other party and some establishment elites in his own party to get what he got. His border had less that 500,000 encounters per year. Biden’s border is having that in two months. Am I satisfied with his numbers?? Heck no. We can do better than that. But we must do better than the Biden administration has done. Also right now one party is trying to pass a bill that will greatly help the situation at the border. The other party is fighting it every step of the way.

The other thing is this fallacy that to fix this problem you need congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform. Bologna!! In fact until the border is fixed no comprehensive reforms should be discussed. Some simple things like reinstating the remain in Mexico policy. I think we negotiated with Mexico that they would control their southern border and cut off the flow of migrants from Central America and other countries as well. I just saw a list of countries from which people cross our southern border illegally. I don’t remember the number but it was large, 60 or 70. Mexico agreed to control their southern border. I laid out a complete plan that can also be done.

Meanwhile with all these huge numbers, we overlook the fact that last year there were over 1 million “gotaways”. We don’t know who they are or if they have bad intentions. When border patrol faces millions coming at them more are going to slip thru the cracks and put Americans at risk.

So how many of these encounters are being dumped into America. In the immortal words of CarlWilson and The Beach Boys, “God Only Knows”. But they are costing the American hard working taxpayer billions and shame on the Biden administration for allowing it to come to this.

One final thought. When a state puts out they (the taxpayer) will provide free health care to illegals they will be drawn to it like a moth to flame. And again hard working Americans foot the bill.

It was what it was then and it is what it is now. It's odd how republicans have blocked 13.6 billion dollars in border funding to help the situation by hiring nearly 6,000 immigration and border security-related employees at DHS but you never mentioned that. Of course I expect no less from you.

They have? I haven't seen that border bill. Please explain.