Landowners, businesses and environmentalists in the region have united to oppose the planned projects, which are part of a $46 billion effort by the Trump administration to line the southern border with a mix of 30-foot-tall steel walls, vehicle barriers, roads and surveillance technology.

Judge Kathleen Cardone said in her ruling that the plaintiffs were “likely to succeed on the merits of at least one of the claims in suit, that there is a likelihood that they will suffer serious, irreparable harm without an injunction, and that the balance of the equities and the public interest weigh in their favor.”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection defended the project in a statement Friday.

“We stand by our assessment and remain confident in our legal authorities to secure the border while preserving the unique landscape of the Big Bend region,” the agency said. “We are working with the Department of Justice on next steps.”

The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The judge’s ruling includes Big Bend National Park, where opposition to the wall prompted the administration to briefly pause construction.

Opponents of the border wall project have argued that the 500-mile-long Big Bend region of Texas is so remote and the landscape so rugged that it serves as its own deterrent to illegal immigration and that the administration violated the law when it issued a swath of waivers allowing it to bypass numerous regulations in order to speed up border wall infrastructure projects.

The lawsuit brought by an environmental organization, advocates for a historic church in Ruidosa and a river guide argued that the Department of Homeland Security was wrong to circumvent regulations meant to protect the environment, culture, and archaeology of regions like the Big Bend area.

Laiken Jordahl, with the Center of Biological Diversity that brought the suit, called Cardone’s ruling a “total victory.”

“The bulldozers are going to be sent packing until she rules on the merits,” Jordahl said. “This is such a historic day for Big Bend and for Texas and the Constitution.”

The court’s decision comes just weeks after the administration erected the first border wall panels in the Big Bend sector in mid-September.

The border wall project throughout the Big Bend sector has sparked bipartisan opposition.

Much of the opposition has been geared around CBP’s plans for inside the Big Bend National Park, which is prized for its beautiful landscapes, limestone cliffs and crystal clear night sky views.

When bulldozers were spotted clearing land in the park in August, it sparked widespread opposition with both Republicans and Democrats calling for the administration to stop. CBP paused all activity there, but that pause expired earlier this week. The administration has said it’s reevaluating plans for the National Park but has not yet said what it will do there.

Advocates for the park on Friday said they were happy with the judge’s ruling but called on the administration to fix the damage already done to Big Bend National Park and develop alternative plans.

“Big Bend is no place for border barriers. It’s time for the administration to come to the table with the border communities that know Big Bend best, repair the damage from this ill-conceived project, and find new solutions,” Tiernan Sittenfeld, National Parks Conservation Association President and CEO, said in a statement.

The judge’s ruling extends to areas upriver and downriver from the national park, where CBP has planned a range of border infrastructure projects that would largely require building across privately owned land.

In those areas, the government has been working to obtain permission from local landowners to survey and build on their land, but in a recent court filing, it said it was prepared to refer some cases to the Justice Department in which it had been unable to secure permission from landowners.