KTBB News, Weather, Talk

COLLIN COUNTY (TEXAS TRIBUNE) – Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing the online messaging service Discord, claiming that the tech company misled users about the platform’s security and exposed kids to predators. In advance of his U.S. Senate GOP runoff against incumbent John Cornyn on Tuesday, Paxton filed the lawsuit on Friday in a Collin County state district court. It is the most recent in a string of lawsuits his office has filed against tech companies and other businesses. Texas has recently filed a lawsuit against Discord, joining Nevada, Indiana, and New Jersey. In March, Florida declared that it was looking into the platform. In recent months, a number of private lawsuits have also been filed, mostly by families who claim that Discord permits children to be sexually abused or exploited while using the messaging app.

Along with a number of other tech companies, Paxton initiated an investigation into the messaging platform in 2024, with a general focus on user data privacy. After conservative pundit Charlie Kirk was killed in October of last year, Paxton declared that he would broaden the scope of his investigation into Discord to include a focus on the platform’s extremist content and the sexual exploitation of minors. People typically use Discord, an online messaging service, to talk to each other while playing video games. Additionally, it has chat features and lets users set up topic-based servers. Paxton has filed lawsuits against other social media and video game companies, including Roblox, Tiktok, and Snapchat, alleging that these companies violate user privacy.

SMITH COUNTY — With the 2025–26 school year coming to an end, East Texas educators are reflecting on the first year of a classroom cell phone ban and the impact they say it had on students.

The end of another school year is here; hallways are empty, and students are already making summer plans. This school year was different as it marked the first year under Texas House Bill 1481, which bans personal communication devices in the classroom. Interim Principal for Winona High School, Jeff Dozier, said that having a state law enforced helped persuade students to keep their phones out of sight.

Teachers at Winona High School, including Theater Director Jeffrey Stokes, said students were more focused on lessons and less concerned about what their classmates were posting on social media.

Longtime math teacher Josh Loeffler at Tyler Legacy High School remembers when cell phones started popping up in the classroom and is glad to see them go. Engagement that helps students build skills both inside and outside the classroom.

JEFF DAVIS COUNTY, Texas – Since news first surfaced late last year that border walls could be built for the first time in the Big Bend region of West Texas, the story has been marked by shifting, unannounced changes to the plan and few clearly communicated details from the Trump administration.

Marfa Public Radio has been closely following developments in the story over the past few months.

Here’s where things stand.

Will there be a border wall anywhere in the Big Bend region?

Yes, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s latest plans.

Physical barriers, in the form of 30-foot-high steel bollard walls, are planned for a 175-mile stretch of the U.S.-Mexico border in Hudspeth, Jeff Davis and Presidio counties.

This plan is broken up into three border wall projects:

1. Big Bend 1 — From Sierra Blanca, TX to near the Hudspeth-Jeff Davis County line

2. Big Bend 2 — From Ruidosa, TX to near the Madera Canyon Campgrounds in Big Bend Ranch State Park

3. Big Bend 3 — From the Hudspeth-Jeff Davis County line to Ruidosa, TX

Federal contracts were awarded in March for each of the three projects.

A $1 billion contract for Big Bend 1 was awarded to Barnard Construction. A $1.2 billion contract for Big Bend 2 was awarded to Fisher Sand and Gravel, and a $960.4 million for Big Bend 3 was also awarded to Barnard Construction.

In late April, a $4.4 million federal contract was awarded to Tierra Right of Way Services for “BB-3 Border Barrier Project Construction Monitoring Services.” CBP told Marfa Public Radio this week that the award is for “environmental and cultural monitors” for that stretch of wall project.

CBP also said that the timeline for completion for these three projects is sometime in 2027.

Landowners along this stretch first began receiving letters from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers the agency handling real estate acquisition for CBP, in February. The public comment period for this section, which was extended several times, was set to close Friday, May 22.

Will there be a border wall in Big Bend National Park?

No, according to CBP’s latest plans.

CBP told Marfa Public Radio this week that it is not planning a 30-foot-high border wall in the national park.

Still, the park is set to receive a combination of border vehicle barriers, surveillance technology and patrol roads, according to CBP.

This plan is outlined under one project:

4. Big Bend 4 — From near the Madera Canyon Campgrounds in Big Bend Ranch State Park, along the Rio Grande across much of the national park, to the “Lower Canyons” of the Rio Grande east of the national park

Last week, DHS awarded a $1.7 billion contract for the national park project to an Albuquerque construction firm.

Though a federal government spending website shows the Big Bend 4 contract award as being for “a border wall in Big Bend, Texas,” CBP has denied that the contract is for a physical wall.

Anti-wall advocates have expressed skepticism that a border wall in the national park, which was previously on the table, is truly not happening.

What are the latest details on the work in the national park?

Brewster County Judge Greg Henington, whose county contains the national park, and other local officials met with CBP representatives last week for a status update on all the Big Bend area border wall projects.

Henington said he learned in that meeting that CBP plans to improve, but not pave, dirt roads in the national park, including River Road and Black Gap Road.

Some existing paved roads in the national park will both be improved, he said, and vehicle barriers in the form of concrete bollards will be installed at spots along the river like Lajitas, Rio Grande Village and La Linda, Henington said.

According to Henington, CBP representatives told local officials that they plan to utilize cameras and sensors with infrared technology to respect the area’s dark sky designation. Still, Henington said they were ultimately “vague on what electronic surveillance really entails.”

Could the border wall plans for the Big Bend region still change?

Yes, absolutely.

Throughout recent months, CBP’s plans have changed multiple times without any formal announcements, press releases or social media posts from the agency.

The changes have often only been noticed thanks to local residents, advocates and news outlets who have been paying close attention to the agency’s “Smart Wall” map — which even disappeared for several weeks from CBP’s website.

When could actual construction on border walls or other infrastructure begin?

It’s hard to say.

Local officials were previously told by CBP in March that construction could begin as soon as June 1, but the agency has not since provided an updated timeline.

Still, contractors are already mobilizing in the region.

One federal contractor began moving heavy equipment to the Rio Grande earlier this month for the Hudspeth-Jeff Davis-Presidio County wall project. This came after a dustup among contractor crews and local county officials about “unauthorized” road work that began on a rural dirt road to the border in April.

Meanwhile, plans are underway for a 500-person “man camp” housing facility for border wall workers south of Van Horn in Lobo. Construction activity on the land has started in recent weeks, though the local groundwater district is still considering whether or not to allow a designated agricultural water well to be used as a commercial well for the project.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is meanwhile in active negotiations with local landowners about acquiring property for the project. Is it unclear how many landowners have authorized border wall construction at this point, or how many will be facing eminent domain proceedings and when those will be initiated.

How are people reacting to all this?

CBP’s plans for border wall building in the remote Big Bend region have sparked widespread bipartisan opposition in recent months.

Five border county sheriffs spoke out against the plans and more than 2,000 people showed up at the Texas Capitol to protest the Big Bend border wall in April.

This week, seven former superintendents of Big Bend National Park sent Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin a letter urging him not to waive federal environmental laws for border barriers in the park, arguing that even new vehicle barriers and roads would be “highly destructive.”

How the wall will impact wildlife, the region’s dark skies, the tourism-based economy and flooding along the river corridor are among the many concerns raised by residents.

Local officials were largely in the dark about the wall plans for many months, prompting a coalition of border county judges to send a letter to Mullin requesting more collaboration with local communities impacted by the project. Now, they are set to meet with CBP officials once every couple of weeks, according to Brewster County Judge Greg Henington.

“ None of this makes any of us happy, but I think it’s a positive that at least they seem to be moving away from this secret squirrel stuff and being more open about it,” he said.

The state’s top elected officials — namely, Republican Gov. Abbott — have remained mostly quiet on the issue, while area lawmakers Sen. Cesar Blanco and Rep. Eddie Morales – both Democrats – have come out in opposition to the wall plan.

The Center for Biological Diversity, a church preservation group and a local river guide have also sued DHS for bypassing federal environmental laws to speed up border wall plans in the region, arguing the move is unconstitutional and would lead to the destruction of “iconic sections” of the Rio Grande corridor.

Does the Big Bend region need a border wall?

This is, of course, at the heart of the debate over the administration’s plans.

The Border Patrol’s “Big Bend Sector” – which stretches across 510 miles of the border – has historically been one of the least-trafficked areas of the southwestern border.

Apprehensions of people crossing the border illegally in the sector fell 74% from 2023 to 2025, according to CBP data. Autonomous surveillance towers have also cut down on traffic significantly, according to the agency. Local sheriffs have said they believe technology can be used to patrol the region’s border “without the need for extensive permanent infrastructure.”

Still, President Trump has long sought to build a physical wall across the entire U.S.-Mexico border since his first term in office. On the first day of his second term in January 2025, he signed an executive order directing the Defense and Homeland Security secretaries to “take all appropriate action to deploy and construct temporary and permanent physical barriers to ensure complete operational control of the southern border.” The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, approved by Congress in July 2025, included $46.5 billion for border wall construction.

___

This story was originally published by Marfa Public Radio and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

STARBASE – SpaceX launched its biggest, most powerful Starship yet on a test flight Friday, an upgraded version that NASA is counting on to land astronauts on the moon.

The redesigned mega rocket made its debut two days after SpaceX CEO Elon Musk announced he’s taking the company public. It blasted off from the southern tip of Texas, carrying 20 mock Starlink satellites that were released midway through the hourlong spaceflight that stretched halfway around the world.

The spacecraft reached its final destination — the Indian Ocean — despite some engine trouble, before erupting in flames upon impact. That last part was not unexpected, according to SpaceX.

Musk called it “an epic” launch and landing.

“You scored a goal for humanity,” he told his team via X.

It’s the 12th test flight of the rocket that Musk is building to get people to Mars one day. But first comes the moon and NASA’s Artemis program.

NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman flew in for the launch, saying Starship is now one step closer to the moon.

The last of the old space-skimming Starships lifted off in October. SpaceX’s third-generation Starship — a souped-up version dubbed V3 — soared from a brand-new launch pad at Starbase, near the Mexican border. Last-minute pad issues thwarted Thursday evening’s launch attempt.

SpaceX was hoping to avoid the fireworks it experienced during back-to-back launches last year when midair explosions rained wreckage down on the Atlantic. Earlier flights also ended in flames.

There was no fireball this time until the very end. The spacecraft plummeted upright into the Indian Ocean under seemingly full control, then toppled over and ignited.

While the liftoff itself went well, not all of the engines fired as the booster attempted a controlled return. The spacecraft also had to make do with fewer engines, but kept heading eastward 120 miles (194 kilometers) up. A pair of modified, camera-equipped Starlinks ejected from Starship provided brief views of the spacecraft in flight — a remarkable first.

At 407 feet (124 meters), the latest model eclipses the older Starship lines by several feet (more than 1 meter) and packs more engine thrust.

The revamped booster sports fewer but bigger and stronger grid fins for steering it back to Earth following liftoff, and a larger and more robust fuel transfer line to feed the 33 main engines. This fuel line is the size of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 first-stage booster. The retro-looking, stainless steel spacecraft also has more of everything — more cameras and more navigation and computer power — as well as docking cones for future rendezvous and moon missions.

Starship is meant to be fully reusable, with giant mechanical arms at the launch pads to catch the returning rocket stages. But on this latest trial run, nothing was being recovered. The Gulf of Mexico marked the end of the road for the redesigned first-stage booster, and the Indian Ocean for the spacecraft and its satellite demos.

NASA is paying SpaceX billions of dollars — and also Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin — to provide the lunar landers that will be used to land Artemis astronauts on the moon.

The two companies are scrambling to be first.

While Starship has reached the fringes of space on multiple flights lasting an hour at most, Bezos’ Blue Moon has yet to lift off, although a prototype is being readied for a moonshot later this year.

NASA is following April’s successful lunar flyaround by four astronauts with a docking trial run in orbit around Earth planned for next year. For that Artemis III mission, astronauts will practice docking their Orion capsule with Starship, Blue Moon or both.

A moon landing by two astronauts — Artemis IV — could follow as soon as 2028 using either Starship or Blue Moon, whichever lander is safer and ready first. It will be NASA’s first lunar landing with a crew since 1972’s Apollo 17. The goal this time is a moon base near the lunar south pole, staffed by astronauts as well as robots.

SpaceX is already taking reservations for private flights to the moon and Mars on Starship.

The world’s first space tourist, California businessman Dennis Tito, and his wife signed up 3 1/2 years ago for a flight around the moon. The timing is uncertain.

This week, another wealthy space tourist — Chinese-born bitcoin investor Chun Wang — announced he will fly to Mars on Starship’s first interplanetary mission. Wang previously chartered a SpaceX polar flight in a Dragon capsule last year and, along with his hand-picked crew, became the first to orbit above the north and south poles.

No price tag or date was revealed for his Mars cruise.

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.