Search This Blog

Thursday, January 10, 2019

Does Trump Have National Emergency Power Regarding the Wall?

~ Photo is from early 2017 - Obama's post-Presidency home in (right) had a 10 ft fence built around to keep undesirables and dangerous people from coming in.. 

All this back n' forth on the wall funding between Trump and the parasite Democrats and it really comes down to two questions:

Does Trump really have National Emergency power to get the funding and assuming he has, then does Trump really have the desire to follow through

The second question, we're not too optimistic but that's a post for another time..   Let's focus on the first question..
Many presidents have declared national emergencies, including George W. Bush after 9/11 and Obama during the swine flu outbreak.

In recent history, they’ve done so under the National Emergencies Act of 1976, which lets presidents issue an emergency declaration but under certain constraints — namely, Trump can only use specific powers Congress has already codified by law, and he has to say which powers he’s using.

The 1976 law was actually passed to rein in presidential power and codify how presidents were going about declaring emergencies, from Franklin D. Roosevelt to Richard Nixon.
Because it offers no definition for what counts as an emergency, it allows a President great leeway as to determining what constitutes one.

If Trump were to try to get border wall funding through the National Emergencies Act, the question then becomes which already-existing laws he could use to get the money.

That’s where he — and the legal scholars trying to figure out what he’s talking about — run into trouble: identifying the laws and statutes he could actually use.
One option that is at Trump's disposal is to put together a lot of different sources of emergency authority, so he tap a lot of different funds and at least start

He could, for example, reallocate military spending on construction projects for the wall.

One law allows the defense secretary, after a national emergency declaration, to direct the army’s civil works program to construct a structure needed for national defense and use the military budget to do it.
Another lets the secretary direct other military services for construction projects. For example, money could come out of the budget for building housing on military bases for service members and into the budget for the wall.

Or, Trump could declare a “state of immigration emergency,” which unlocks an immigration emergency fund. It’s generally supposed to be used to help states feed and house migrants and process their claims but it is vaguely worded enough to permit an edgy interpretation that could get the funds for the wall.

The issue with that however is that the fund only has about $20 million at the moment, not enough for Trump’s wall.
But if Trump's legal team could identify enough emergency declaration laws to cobble together, they could start to gather the funds - perhaps Trump is holding back on that option because he rather have the whole $5.7B up front v getting in dribs n' drabs.. Who knows..

Since Trump started talking about declaring an emergency to fund the border wall, there has been some debate about whether he has the legal authority to do so.

Of course politicians, historians and law professors who are liberal say it would be illegal
A law professor at Yale University, wrote in an op-ed for the Trump-hating New York Times over the weekend that Trump cannot declare an emergency at the border because it would force the armed forces tasked with carrying out his orders to choose between abiding by the commander-in-chief’s wishes and committing a federal crime.

Others argue that the President cannot spend money unless it’s been authorized by Congress

And of course other straw-grasping arguments have been presented based not on law but despisal of Trump and wanting to hurt him every way possible
Some liberal academics argue if Congress passed a joint resolution against the National Emergency act, it effectively prevents Trump from doing it

The despicable Democrats can masturbate fantasize this scenario all they wish but thanks to a 35-year-old court case 'Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha', the Supreme Court decided that a one-house legislative veto violated the Constitution.

That means bitch Pelosi and her gang in the House is powerless to stop Trump that way unless a Republican majority Senate who by and large agree with Trump on border security magically goes against him
And even if something passed based on simple majority in both Houses, Trump unless he turned insane, would not be willing to sign a joint resolution to reject his own emergency declaration, so that means that Congress would need to override him with a 2/3 majority in each chamber.

In other words, the safeguard liberals think is there in the National Emergencies Act turns out not to be there,and if the fight did go to the Supreme Court, they would never go for it, especially now that thankfully we have a Supreme Court with two new members who are supportive of the President.

Any decisions either way would take time..
If Trump could get the funding and the wall built while it goes through the courts, then really there's no reason why he should not be doing this now, unless he feels he needs to lay the groundwork through his speeches to soften the blow of Americans who mostly aren't paying attention.

Of course liberals argue there's no new emergency at the border while ignoring the fact its not 'new' because it has been there for decades and past Presidents from Reagan to the colored licorice stick never had the guts or desire to deal with it beyond band-aids

So now it really comes down to whether Trump is making an empty threat or will it be like he said at a Cabinet meeting to the press last week -- that you don't make threats unless you intend to back them up

Guess it will depend on which side of his Gemini mind makes the decision