U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott said President Trump’s $46.5 billion investment in a ‘smart border wall’ combines physical barriers with surveillance technology designed to help agents identify and respond to illegal crossings more efficiently.

Speaking at a policy event in Washington, Scott said funding from the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill,' signed last year, supports autonomous surveillance towers, radar and artificial intelligence. The systems allow agents to review sensor alerts on their phones and distinguish potential criminal activity from hikers, horseback riders, or other harmless movement before dispatching personnel.

Scott said the technology saves thousands of staff hours by reducing unnecessary responses and expands the territory agents can monitor. He also described portable drones that provide overhead surveillance, helicopters for rapid response, and MQ-9 aircraft that can remain airborne for extended periods. CBP is coordinating its investments with other Department of Homeland Security agencies, including the Coast Guard, to avoid overlapping deployments and match resources to operational needs.

Scott said the objective is to know and control what enters the country while operating within the law.

Illegal immigration remains a major concern for Americans who want entry rules enforced consistently and the government to maintain control over the border. A physical wall can obstruct a crossing, but stopping someone who gets around it requires detection and an available agent. The technology Scott described is meant to connect those functions and improve effectiveness by giving personnel better information about where intervention is needed.

This makes staffing more practical across large stretches of terrain where agents cannot watch every location. Time spent investigating harmless movement is time not available to respond to an illegal crossing or suspected criminal activity.

A $46.5 billion investment is not chump change, and with that type of investment, strong results are to be expected. Scott has described improvements in how agents assess alerts, but did not provide figures showing how many crossings the system has prevented. With such lucrative funding secured, the administration owes taxpayers a clear accounting of where the wall is closing routes, where gaps remain, and whether agents are stopping more attempts to cross illegally.

If immigration is a deciding issue for you this November, the wall investment gives you a specific policy to weigh against campaign promises. Republicans can point to funding approved under President Trump, while voters can examine whether implementation supports their claims of stronger border control.

Preventing new illegal entries addresses a different problem from immigration enforcement inside the country. Surveillance towers and barriers cannot resolve the status of people already here, determine asylum cases, or carry out deportations, as those require other decisions and resources.

The expansion therefore represents one part of the immigration agenda. With midterms mere weeks away, the results will help determine which lawmakers oversee its spending and shape the policies that accompany enforcement beyond the border itself.