03-10-2025

Honoring Jocelyn Nungaray

Executive OrderView the Original .pdf
View the Original .pdf

The 1-Minute Brief

What: Executive Order 14229 renames the Anahuac National Wildlife Refuge in Texas as the "Jocelyn Nungaray National Wildlife Refuge."

Money: The order does not specify appropriations. Costs will be incurred for updating signage, maps, and official documents. For perspective, the 2023 renaming of nine Army bases with Confederate names was estimated to cost $39 million.

Your Impact: For most Americans, the direct impact is symbolic. For those who visit the Texas refuge, they will see a new name honoring a crime victim. The order is part of a broader, high-profile debate on immigration and border security.

Status: Signed by the President on March 4, 2025, and ordered to be implemented by the Secretary of the Interior within 30 days. The name change was made official by the Secretary of the Interior on March 10, 2025.

What's Actually in the Bill

This executive order directs the Secretary of the Interior to rename the Anahuac National Wildlife Refuge, a 39,000-acre coastal sanctuary in Texas, in honor of Jocelyn Nungaray. The order explicitly links this action to the tragic death of the 12-year-old girl and critiques the immigration policies of the "prior administration."

Core Provisions:

  • The "Anahuac National Wildlife Refuge" shall be renamed the "Jocelyn Nungaray National Wildlife Refuge."
  • The Secretary of the Interior is ordered to take all necessary actions to complete the renaming within 30 days of the order's date (March 4, 2025).
  • All federal references, including maps, contracts, and documents, must be updated to reflect the new name.
  • Jocelyn Nungaray's life is to be permanently commemorated at the refuge.

Stated Purpose (from the Sponsors):

The order states its purpose is to forever honor and preserve the memory of Jocelyn Nungaray. It frames the renaming as a response to what it calls "open-border policies" that it holds responsible for the murder of innocent Americans by "illegal aliens," citing Jocelyn's case as a prime example.

Key Facts:

Affected Sectors: Federal Government (Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), Conservation, and potentially Tourism.
Timeline: The renaming was ordered to be executed by early April 2025. The Secretary of the Interior signed the official order on March 10, 2025.
Scope: The order renames a specific 39,000-acre federal property in Texas but is used to make a national statement on immigration policy.

The Backstory: How We Got Here

Timeline of Events:

The Crime and Initial Arrests (2024):

  • June 17, 2024: 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray's body is discovered in a creek in North Houston, Texas. She had been sexually assaulted and strangled.
  • June 20, 2024: Two Venezuelan nationals, Johan Jose Martinez-Rangel, 22, and Franklin Jose Peña Ramos, 26, are arrested and charged with capital murder.
  • March & May 2024: U.S. Border Patrol had previously apprehended both suspects near El Paso after they entered the country illegally. Martinez-Rangel was apprehended on March 14 and Peña Ramos on May 28; both were released with notices to appear in court.
  • September 2024: A grand jury indicts the suspects on additional charges of kidnapping and aggravated sexual assault.
  • December 13, 2024: The Harris County District Attorney announces she will seek the death penalty for both men.

The Political Reaction (2024-2025):

  • The case quickly gains national attention, becoming a focal point in the debate over immigration and border security.
  • The suspects' alleged affiliation with the violent Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua, heightens concerns about transnational criminal organizations. This gang is known for human smuggling, extortion, and violence across the Americas.
  • March 4, 2025: During an address to a joint session of Congress, the President honors Jocelyn Nungaray, who he says loved animals, and signs the executive order renaming the wildlife refuge.
  • March 10, 2025: The Secretary of the Interior formally signs the order renaming the refuge.
  • April 24, 2025: Governor Greg Abbott and the Secretary of the Interior attend a renaming ceremony at the refuge, calling it a "lasting tribute to a beautiful young soul."

Why Now? The Political Calculus:

  • The executive order was issued just six weeks into a new presidential term, using a high-profile, tragic case to underscore a commitment to stricter border enforcement.
  • The timing leverages the emotional weight of Jocelyn's murder to criticize the previous administration's immigration policies, which are described in the order as having "inexcusably endangered" the nation.
  • By linking a specific crime to a national policy failure, the administration aims to build public support for its border security agenda and put political pressure on opponents.

Your Real-World Impact

The Direct Answer: This directly affects a specific community and federal agency but is intended to have a symbolic impact on all Americans by highlighting a major political issue.

What Could Change for You:

Potential Benefits:

  • For supporters of the order's sentiment, it provides a sense of acknowledgment and a permanent memorial for a crime victim, symbolizing a tougher stance on crime by immigrants.
  • Jocelyn's family expressed that the renaming was a "very surreal, very bittersweet" honor that recognized their daughter's love for animals and her desire to be known.

Possible Disruptions or Costs:

Short-term (1-6 months):

  • Taxpayer funds will be used to replace signage, update websites, and change official government maps and documents.

Long-term:

  • The name change is permanent, serving as a lasting reminder of the crime and the political context in which the renaming occurred. It sets a precedent for using federal land names to make political statements.

Who's Most Affected:

Primary Groups: The family of Jocelyn Nungaray, residents of the Anahuac, TX area, and employees of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service who manage the refuge.
Secondary Groups: Advocacy groups focused on immigration reform (both for and against stricter enforcement), and communities along the U.S. southern border.
Regional Impact: The most direct impact is in Chambers County, Texas, where the refuge is located. The broader political and social impact is felt most strongly in border states.

Bottom Line: A federal wildlife refuge in Texas now has a new name intended to serve as a national symbol in the ongoing, heated debate over U.S. immigration policy and border security.

Where the Parties Stand

Republican Position: "A Devastating Consequence of Weak Border Policies"

Core Stance: The murder of Jocelyn Nungaray is a direct and tragic result of failed Democratic border policies, justifying immediate and decisive action.

Their Arguments:

  • ✓ The renaming honors an innocent victim and serves as a permanent reminder of the human cost of unsecured borders.
  • ✓ The executive order correctly identifies the previous administration's policies as the root cause of increased crime by undocumented immigrants.
  • ✓ Highlighting the suspects' alleged ties to the Tren de Aragua gang validates the need for designations of such groups as terrorist organizations.

Legislative Strategy: Using high-profile cases like this to push for stricter immigration enforcement, funding for a border wall, ending "catch-and-release" policies, and passing legislation like "Jocelyn's Law" to deny bail for certain suspects.

Democratic Position: "Politicizing a Tragedy"

Core Stance: While the crime is a horrific tragedy, using an executive order to rename federal property in this manner is a political act designed to inflame the immigration debate rather than solve it.

Their Arguments:

  • ✓ The individuals who committed this heinous crime should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
  • ⚠️ Naming federal property should follow a more deliberative process, not be done via executive fiat to make a political point. In the past, Democrats have responded to Republican naming proposals they see as political by offering satirical counter-proposals, such as renaming a federal prison after Donald Trump.
  • ✗ The order unfairly demonizes all immigrants by blaming a broad policy for the criminal actions of two individuals.

Legislative Strategy: Focusing on comprehensive immigration reform that combines border security with streamlined legal immigration pathways and addressing the root causes of migration, while condemning the use of tragic events for political messaging.

Constitutional Check

The Verdict: ✓ Constitutional

Basis of Authority:

The executive order cites the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) as its legal authority. This act governs the administration of the National Wildlife Refuge System.

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966: This law consolidates the authority for managing the refuge system under the Secretary of the Interior. It grants the Secretary, as delegated by the President, broad authority over the administration and management of refuges, which includes naming and renaming sites unless a name was specifically set by Congress.

Constitutional Implications:

[Executive Authority]: The President's authority to issue this order flows from their power to oversee the executive branch and direct its officers, in this case, the Secretary of the Interior. The Secretary has the statutory power to manage and, by extension, name the properties under their jurisdiction.
[Precedent]: Presidents and Congress have renamed federal lands and properties on numerous occasions to honor individuals or for other purposes. For example, in 2020, a bill was signed to rename the Oyster Bay National Wildlife Refuge after a former congressman.
[Federalism]: The action involves federally owned and managed land, so it does not overstep into powers reserved for the states.

Potential Legal Challenges:

Legal challenges to this order are highly unlikely to succeed. The executive branch has clear statutory authority to name and rename national wildlife refuges that were not originally named by an act of Congress. Any opposition would likely be political rather than legal.