Yes, The President Can Declare A 'National Emergency' To Build A Wall

[Nickyjo]

If ol stretch face doesn't negotiate in good faith, ie, give in on some substantial border wall wall wall funding, Trump will have shown she was never intending to negotiate in good faith and bam... shut down and it will be HER shut down. Genius.

The wall goes up no matter what... Trump wants to get reelected and he cannot otherwise... you see, we demand it.

Let me get this straight: not giving in to Trump is negotiating in bad faith? Democrats and republicans have already negotiated for more border security and immigration reforms per Trump’s inclinations. Trump can sign or veto what ever final product they come up with.

Trump has already done and is still doing wonderful or terrible things on immigration, depending on one’s point of view. He could run again on that without the blunder of insisted on a wall and having taken total credit for the shutdown. He has already finessed the “Mexico will pay” argument without harming his rep with his supporters, and could have finessed the wall issue too. He successfully (sort of, if you discount the first week of airport chaos) retreated from the total Muslim ban to something more defensible without losing supporters.

Jeb was right. Trump is the chaos president.

 

[Nickyjo]

Screw your lame opinions on what is a national emergency or not.

He will build it because we voted him in AND WE DEMAND IT. All the rest is the particulars to get it done. Trump was born with more competence and motivation in just his left pinky than a slenderman or the crooked fat lady could ever have hoped to aquire by a lifetime of experience. Which, by the way, they have not done, they've squandered their lives on the sillinesses in life while he was out there doing, building things.

Trump tried to work within the established system as best he could his first two years. Now he, and we, see that system is totally broken and he needs just take action. Once he starts, with his ENTIRE BASE BEHIND HIM, try to stop us. You won't, you can't, we are stronger, more motivated and more skilled than you overeducated do nothings... your party of choice is a...

JOKE.

Trump’s competence seems confined to his left pinky. Check out the bankruptcies, inability to get loans, Trump U, Trump steaks, etc. He is a great con man, however. Somehow he’s convinced you to DEMAND a wall.

 

[lwf]

Not only can the president declare an emergency.
He can ignore the courts.
And he can use the military however he wants.

But he's feckless, so it's just a dream.

Trump cannot ignore the courts, and the courts will not ignore an abuse of the power to declare a national emergency. There is a better than even chance the next president will be a democrat, and if Trump is allowed to fabricate a national emergency, then she will be too.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

And you, apparently, don't know how the system can, and often does, function.

That may be how the "law works", but Trump merely, a la slenderman NRB appointment rules [ see https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/26/business/court-rejects-recess-appointments-to-labor-board.html ], just assigns his executive branch to spend the money and start building, adding on to existing walls, barriers what have you, while it wends its way through the courts.

He has the full legal authority to do so, as per the law, and so he can, probably will, do it.

Who is gonna stop him? Who will take down the wall after its built? Nobody. Some will try, but as you said, it will be challenged and nothing against it will happen for years.

When its all said and done it will be... done.

Who? The courts. What a delusional question.

 

[<alt>doxygen]

I hope he tries it.opcorn:

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Trump’s competence seems confined to his left pinky. Check out the bankruptcies, inability to get loans, Trump U, Trump steaks, etc. He is a great con man, however. Somehow he’s convinced you to DEMAND a wall.

Pfffffttttt...think those are bad, eh?

Well, he didn't put us in a hole, messing with 17% of our entire economy fudging up the health system for the ENTIRE country using guys like Gruber, who inadvertently coped to lying about it to the American people to get it done... if ya really wanna talk about con men. And of course slenderfella himself with his you can keep your plan, keep your doctor, it ll reduce your family premiums by an average of $2500 per year...

You one of those brilliant folks that voted him in to bend us all over for that Democrat proctologist to give us an exam like that, are ya? :shock: I guess maybe Democrats enjoy that kinda treatment, do they?

 

[Idiometer]

Yes, he can, but not without congressional approval.

https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...-and-when-can-a-president-legally-declare-one

"Congress, however, can check the executive branch and overrule the president's use of the act by passing a joint resolution out of the House and Senate. Like a law, the resolution would require a simple majority in each chamber and require the president's signature, or require Congress to override his veto."

Get your popcorn ready for another showdown between Trump and Pelosi. My money is on Pelosi.

opcorn2:

 

[lwf]

Yes, he can, but not without congressional approval.

https://www.usnews.com/news/nationa...-and-when-can-a-president-legally-declare-one

"Congress, however, can check the executive branch and overrule the president's use of the act by passing a joint resolution out of the House and Senate. Like a law, the resolution would require a simple majority in each chamber and require the president's signature, or require Congress to override his veto."

Get your popcorn ready for another showdown between Trump and Pelosi. My money is on Pelosi.

opcorn2:

Interesting article. There is a link to a New York Times op-ed in that article: According to Yale Law Professor Bruce Ackerman, if the national emergency declaration turned out to be illegal, any armed forces who carry out the order could be charged with a federal crime. I doubt that would actually happen, but it raises the prospect of the military simply refusing to obey Trump's orders at that point.

 

[Nickyjo]

Pfffffttttt...think those are bad, eh?

Well, he didn't put us in a hole, messing with 17% of our entire economy fudging up the health system for the ENTIRE country using guys like Gruber, who inadvertently coped to lying about it to the American people to get it done... if ya really wanna talk about con men. And of course slenderfella himself with his you can keep your plan, keep your doctor, it ll reduce your family premiums by an average of $2500 per year...

You one of those brilliant folks that voted him in to bend us all over for that Democrat proctologist to give us an exam like that, are ya? :shock: I guess maybe Democrats enjoy that kinda treatment, do they?

How many millions more have insurance that didn't before Obama, who copied his plan from republicans? True, the keep your doctor thing might have been wishful thinking -- Obama's WMD fantasy, with fewer fatalities -- tho I presume it has worked out fairly well, as the ACA is more popular.

Just wait a few years: republicans will be resisting some other health issue, all the while insisting that they will protect Obamacare. Only they wisely won't call it Obamacare any more. Two things are fairly certain: 1- any programs like this will have starting and growing pains; this certainly did... 2- conservatives will claim the sky is falling if we institute them. Look up St. Reagan's attack on Medicare in the 1960s, how future enslaved generations would tell their children what it was like when America was free. If you want to go back further, check how increasing opposition by the GOP to SS (50-50), Medicare (leaning against) and the ACA (not one vote) has made them more out of touch with public thinking. But the GOP has learned something at least. Their mantra of opposition was repeal and *replace*, not just repeal. People will keep voting for republicans -- very useful as "brakes" to some of us liberals' battier ideas -- so long as they don't destroy what democrats have set up.

Anyway, for better or worse, the rest of the developed world, including a relatively poor country like Mexico, has govt insurance in one form or another.

Any day now, Trump as promised will reveal his far better plan. Otherwise he and GOP have nothing to offer, other than making it more difficult for the program to operate. Nice. Meanwhile, my wife who had cancer will be able to get insurance if/when she leaves work and my son can stay on her policy.

Btw, what would have been your alternative?

 

[Gaius46]

Ask Andrew Jackson.


The constitution explicitly states that anchor babies are citizens? I must have missed that one.

Ask him what? The idea that Jackson ignored a court ruling is a myth. It never happened.

 

[Gaius46]

While the lawsuits are going through the system, the wall will be in the process of construction.

Except for eminent domain cases. There are still several hundred ongoing eminent domain cases from the last time the government tried to build sections of wall down there in 2007.

Trump will be a distant unpleasant memory by the time any new cases are resolved.

 

[Gaius46]

If no law is violated, the court has no choice but to recognize that fact. The court doesn't have the authority to interpret the law, nor The Constitution at will.

Marbury v Madison.

You should read and understand it.

 

[Gaius46]

Screw your lame opinions on what is a national emergency or not.

He will build it because we voted him in AND WE DEMAND IT. All the rest is the particulars to get it done. Trump was born with more competence and motivation in just his left pinky than a slenderman or the crooked fat lady could ever have hoped to aquire by a lifetime of experience. Which, by the way, they have not done, they've squandered their lives on the sillinesses in life while he was out there doing, building things.

Trump tried to work within the established system as best he could his first two years. Now he, and we, see that system is totally broken and he needs just take action. Once he starts, with his ENTIRE BASE BEHIND HIM, try to stop us. You won't, you can't, we are stronger, more motivated and more skilled than you overeducated do nothings... your party of choice is a...

JOKE.

And if you demanded a return to segregation he’d do that too?

The point of a Constitutional Republic is to constraint the people. Because the people want it is piss poor reason.

 

[jnug]

So Donald Duck wants us to believe that after 35 days of Shutdown, IF and I do mean if he thought he could get National Emergency by the Courts he would not have done it then and not 21 days hence....or 35 days ago....or if an actual National Emergency long before his comments about wanting a "Legislative Deal" for his Wall. BS!!!!!

He might try it out of desperation. He has not tried it to this point because his chances are slim to none pulling it off and once he has been rejected by both of the other branches of government, he is done forever with this Wall nonsense and will have left himself utterly destitute politically, which he is not at the moment as it relates to the Wall.

 

[apdst]

Marbury v Madison.

You should read and understand it.

I have read it. The Surpreme court csn't make law, can't change law and can't grant, nor deny power to any of the three branches.

 

[apdst]

And if you demanded a return to segregation he’d do that too?

The point of a Constitutional Republic is to constraint the people. Because the people want it is piss poor reason.

It's called "representation". If the people want it and elect representatives that will build it, then that's a good enough reson. No one's rights will be trampled if a wall is built.

 

[Gaius46]

It's called "representation". If the people want it and elect representatives that will build it, then that's a good enough reson. No one's rights will be trampled if a wall is built.

No it’s not a good enough reason. It has comply with the constitution. Period.

Rights aren’t the issue. Legality is. Trump wants a wall he has to get Congress to fund it. He isn’t a dictator. That’s the way it works.

 

[Gaius46]

I have read it. The Surpreme court csn't make law, can't change law and can't grant, nor deny power to any of the three branches.

No one has said they can make law though in a system like ours which is derived from common law traditions they actually do make law based on how they interpret the law and the fact that those interpretations may be binding on other courts.

The SC has the power to review laws to insure they comply with the constitution. The SC similarly had the power to insure that the branches of government comply with the law.

 

[apdst]

No it’s not a good enough reason. It has comply with the constitution. Period.

Rights aren’t the issue. Legality is. Trump wants a wall he has to get Congress to fund it. He isn’t a dictator. That’s the way it works.

It does comply with The Constitution:

Article 4

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

If Congress refuses to comply with The Constitution, they're violating The Constitution.

As far as President Trump building the wall, he has the authority to declare emergency power and allocate the money. If there are people who don't like it that he has that authority, they should contact their congress critters and petition them for a redress of greviences. I don't think there are a majority of United States citizens who represent a majority who want open borders.

 

[apdst]

No one has said they can make law though in a system like ours which is derived from common law traditions they actually do make law based on how they interpret the law and the fact that those interpretations may be binding on other courts.

The SC has the power to review laws to insure they comply with the constitution. The SC similarly had the power to insure that the branches of government comply with the law.

The court already ruled on the emergency powers act. The law has been around since 1976. You think the court is going to void the emergency act decisions that are still in place, today? That would be an incredible over reach.

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/NEA Declarations.pdf

Some of which sanction Russia, prohibit trade with terrorists, restrict weapons proliferation, etc. I can't see the court do so, nor should they.

 

[MovingPictures]

The court already ruled on the emergency powers act. The law has been around since 1976. You think the court is going to void the emergency act decisions that are still in place, today? That would be an incredible over reach.

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/NEA Declarations.pdf

Some of which sanction Russia, prohibit trade with terrorists, restrict weapons proliferation, etc. I can't see the court do so, nor should they.

:lamo

You think court would be overreaching, but not the president?

Trump's wall would require the purchasing of miles of private land, which would tie this up in court regardless if he wins, so it would be pointless for him to declare a national emergency, and that's why he ultimately won't.

 

[iguanaman]

Not only can the president declare an emergency.
He can ignore the courts.
And he can use the military however he wants.

But he's feckless, so it's just a dream.

The dream of a coup? The military hates Trump and for good reason. He's a traitor. They will drag their feet like there is no tomorrow and with Trump that is not a dream. His days are becoming increasingly numbered.

 

[MovingPictures]

It does comply with The Constitution:



If Congress refuses to comply with The Constitution, they're violating The Constitution.

As far as President Trump building the wall, he has the authority to declare emergency power and allocate the money. If there are people who don't like it that he has that authority, they should contact their congress critters and petition them for a redress of greviences. I don't think there are a majority of United States citizens who represent a majority who want open borders.

No, the power of the purse is strictly a Congressional matter, not an executive one. Presidents don't just get to declare national emergencies when the Congress disagrees with their agenda.

You're playing a dangerous game, because this is a weapon a Democrat president could use for his own causes.

 

[apdst]

No, the power of the purse is strictly a Congressional matter, not an executive one. Presidents don't just get to declare national emergencies when the Congress disagrees with their agenda.

You're playing a dangerous game, because this is a weapon a Democrat president could use for his own causes.

The president has the authority to re-allocate money that's already been given to the Executive Branch.

If Congress disagrees, it can put up a 2/3 vote in both houses and stop it. Short of that, there isn't much they can do.

 

[apdst]

:lamo

You think court would be overreaching, but not the president?

Trump's wall would require the purchasing of miles of private land, which would tie this up in court regardless if he wins, so it would be pointless for him to declare a national emergency, and that's why he ultimately won't.

Or, maybe not.