- Joined
- Apr 18, 2013
- Messages
- 94,358
- Reaction score
- 82,747
- Location
- Barsoom
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
2/2/19
When President Trump agreed to end the historically long government shutdown on Jan. 26, he said the fiasco he triggered would be repeated in three weeks unless Congress came up with a deal on border security that he could accept. Since then, however, Trump has signaled that he doesn’t care what lawmakers do — he may not force another shutdown, but he is determined to build his border wall, with or without Congress appropriating the money. Members of the House and Senate appropriations committees started meeting last week to try to bridge the gap between the $7.3 billion in additional spending Trump has sought for border security — including $5.7 billion for work on a border wall that could cost many billions more to complete — and the roughly $1.8 billion Democrats have proposed, none of it for the wall. They had barely gotten past the pleasantries, however, before Trump told the New York Times that the bargaining was “a waste of time.” It’s always risky to take this president’s statements too seriously, no matter how many times he may repeat them. A case in point: Mexico will not be paying for the wall, at least not in any way that’s real and measurable. Yet Trump has painted himself into such a tight corner on this issue, it seems as if his only way out is to build some version of the wall he promised during his campaign. That may be why he has seized on the highly questionable idea of shifting money from some other, previously funded project under the rubric of a national emergency. The issue isn’t Trump’s legal power to declare an emergency; Congress has given the White House wide discretion to make such decisions. Instead, the issue is whether any of the specific powers Congress has given the president to use in emergencies — for example, to authorize the use of an unapproved prescription drug, to test a chemical weapon or sell surplus government property without a public auction — could be applied to this situation.
Some observers point to the 1982 Military Construction Codification Act, which states that when a national emergency “requires use of the armed forces,” the Defense Department “may undertake military construction projects ... not otherwise authorized by law that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces.” That strains credulity. The military doesn’t need a wall to perform its work on the border, which isn’t being overrun by enemy soldiers or even by migrant civilians, who are crossing in numbers far lower than in 2000. Instead, the system is being overwhelmed by the number of families seeking asylum. The bigger problem is that Trump could set a precedent for future presidents to usurp Congress’ constitutional power over the federal purse by treating political disputes as national emergencies. Presidents cannot dictate how lawmakers spend tax dollars; they have to persuade Congress. And clearly, Trump is not doing so. Regardless of Trump’s posturing, lawmakers should craft a deal that addresses the humanitarian problems caused by the backlog in asylum requests and the surge in families seeking protection. They should also use the opportunity to provide permanent relief to “Dreamers,” the young immigrants brought to the country illegally by their parents when they were children. But they should not be cowed by the president’s posturing into wasting billions of dollars on an ineffective border wall. And if Trump carries out his threat to spend the money anyway, the courts should remind him that the president’s emergency powers have limits.
The problem with Trump's 'national emergency' plan is much bigger than any wall
I highly doubt the Trump administration could convince most Federal judges that a "national emergency" exists on the southern border. The facts just don't support such a cockeyed conclusion.
What is obvious is that, for purely partisan political reasons, Trump would be attempting to usurp/arrogate the power of Congress to appropriate federal funding.
The problem with Trump's 'national emergency' plan is much bigger than any wall
I highly doubt the Trump administration could convince most Federal judges that a "national emergency" exists on the southern border. The facts just don't support such a cockeyed conclusion.
What is obvious is that, for purely partisan political reasons, Trump would be attempting to usurp/arrogate the power of Congress to appropriate federal funding.
The problem with Trump's 'national emergency' plan is much bigger than any wall
I highly doubt the Trump administration could convince most Federal judges that a "national emergency" exists on the southern border. The facts just don't support such a cockeyed conclusion.
What is obvious is that, for purely partisan political reasons, Trump would be attempting to usurp/arrogate the power of Congress to appropriate federal funding.
What about Congressiuonal Disapproval to terminate any declared "emergency".
Only needs a majority vote in the House and the Senate.
GOP senators will be forced to chose between their party (or Trump) and Congress. Balance of opinion is that enough will vote against Trump.
Where would that put Trump ?
Politically dead ?
The bigger issue is not so much trump is abusing his power by declaring a national emergency for his wall to bypass congress for purely political reasons. The bigger issue is how much his supporters are cheering this abuse of power.
Sounds to me like the anti-Trump talking potato heads are getting frantic. It's causing them to turn into these guys...
OK Trumpsters, tell us why if Trump gets away with declaring this a national crisis after all this time, what is to stop any president in the future from using this exact same tactic to bypass Congress on any issue? Remember, Trump has said "Give me the funding I want or I will declare a national crisis!" Can you tell us what is to stop him or any future president from repeating this line to further his agenda?
Under the law, he doesn't have to. It doesn't require some live, or die, dire emergency.
The biggest issue is the precedent this will set for both parties in the future. He knows it'll be tied up in court and won't be built, he's only be doing this to convince The Cult he did as much as he could. The Repubs will end up regretting the day Trump takes them down this road.
Try looking past the next election. Just remember our warnings when the Dems declare their first emergency...
So could gun violence in America qualify as a national emergency, such that a future democratic president could bypass congress to put gun control laws into effect?
Under the law, he doesn't have to. It doesn't require some live, or die, dire emergency.
President Trump isn't bypassing Congress, nor The Constitution.
The bigger issue is not so much trump is abusing his power by declaring a national emergency for his wall to bypass congress for purely political reasons. The bigger issue is how much his supporters are cheering this abuse of power.
Declaring a national emergency would be an attempt to bypass Congress. Congress can prevent Trump from using congressionally approved funds to build his wall. It isn't clear that Congress could prevent Trump from declaring a national emergency and appropriating funds without its approval. If that's the case, he most certainly would be bypassing Congress.
President Trump isn't bypassing Congress, nor The Constitution.
So could gun violence in America qualify as a national emergency, such that a future democratic president could bypass congress to put gun control laws into effect?
He can declare it. It won't get past the Courts. That is the beauty of this system. Trump is so obviously trying to usurp the Article 1 powers vested in Congress that he is going to run right into the hard wall of Article 3 and find that the Courts will defend the Congress against Trump's tyranny.
Trump is so obviously trying to usurp the Article 1 powers vested in Congress that he is going to run right into the hard wall of Article 3 and find that the Courts will defend the Congress against Trump's tyranny.
correct, he is only attempting to
He will be prevented in the end from so doing.
What about Congressiuonal Disapproval to terminate any declared "emergency".
Only needs a majority vote in the House and the Senate.
GOP senators will be forced to chose between their party (or Trump) and Congress. Balance of opinion is that enough will vote against Trump.
Where would that put Trump ?
Politically dead ?
Reading this and other threads makes me wonder if those complaining are doing do because it is Trump. It is pretty clear the illegal immigration into the US is a problem. The amount of illegal drugs is also a problem. Does it amount to a National Emergency, maybe not. However, the issue of illegal crossings into the US has been ignored by both sides of Congress. Congress seems to ignore the problems. Much like they ignore coming up with a budget on time.
this Wall is not the answer and that is the real problem. It is and will be failed white elephant if it ever were to be built.
.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?