National Emergencies .....

[Rightguide]

I raised the issue of Martial Law because once it's declared there is no power that the courts can use against it. They have NO jurisdiction. (Nor does Congress.)

Like I said, it'd be interesting to see what would happen if Trump did that.

Some months ago I suggested the President could declare a national emergency and identify a military zone of operations along the border under his powers as CnC.

All we need to do is look at history. FDR declared martial law over the entire Hawaiian island chain for the duration of WWII after Pearl Harbor, and took over the entire American economy in WWII. As CnC Abraham Lincoln arrested the legislature of Maryland. Presidents have entered Mexico on punitive expeditions on the authority of the President alone. Presidents have deployed troops on the border and have put Marines on trains to protect the mail. The President deployed United States Marines to enforce the law in California during the Rodney King riots. Inherently the CnC has enormous power under the Constitution and existing statutes. Libs don't want to understand this as long as Trump is President.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Libs don't want to understand this as long as Trump is President.

No at all. I was merely suggesting other National Emergencies that 46 is sure to declare, now that Tiny seems prepared to lower the bar (as opposed to real emergencies like WW2 and the Civil War)

Climate Change
Voter Suppression
Infrastructure Decay

And I am not a "Lib". Just a realist.

 

[Wrong Element]

You can tell it's a real 9-11-type emergency because he's winging it and not using a Teleprompter, he opened his remarks by talking about trade and North Korea, and he's heading to Mar-a-Lago right after he's done.

And then does what?

What's the end goal? Where's the threat specifically coming from? What Depts of the Administration are to be used to combat this "emergency"? What's it going to cost? Will there be any infringements upon enumerated Constitutional Rights? Would there be a specific period of time before the "emergency" is over?

A "National Emergency" declaration is to stabilize an issue, not change policy absent an Act of Congress. Building a "wall" stabilizes the border and enforces existing laws until the existing problems are mitigated/resolved, or Congress acts.

Declaring Global Warming an emergency does nothing except usurp power. But, I guess your fart fantasy President Harris could always deploy FEMA and their trailers across the US.

One day we will have a Republican House that does not share the spending priorities of a Democratic president, and I look forward to the howls of outrage that will ensue when that president inevitably uses the defense budget however he/she likes under the cover of "national emergency."

 

[HisArpy]

No at all. I was merely suggesting other National Emergencies that 46 is sure to declare, now that Tiny seems prepared to lower the bar (as opposed to real emergencies like WW2 and the Civil War)

Climate Change
Voter Suppression
Infrastructure Decay

And I am not a "Lib". Just a realist.

What you "suggest" is merely an attempt to fearmonger in the hopes that Trump won't do what he's doing.

Fear is the only weapon progressives truly have. Just like when confronting every bully, once you stand up to them, they slink away and hide in the shadows.

 

[HisArpy]

You can tell it's a real 9-11-type emergency because he's winging it and not using a Teleprompter, he opened his remarks by talking about trade and North Korea, and he's heading to Mar-a-Lago right after he's done.







One day we will have a Republican House that does not share the spending priorities of a Democratic president, and I look forward to the howls of outrage that will ensue when that president inevitably uses the defense budget however he/she likes under the cover of "national emergency."

If/when that happens, the shoe will certainly be on the other foot.

But, if it's legal, it's legal. The solution is for Congress to repeal the authority given to the President which enables him to do this. Not whine about the use. Or gloat in a possible payback by a different President.

 

[coati]

So, there is no compelling evidence to support that the need for a border wall is any more of a national emergency than it was during the last two times that Congress debated this subject, including the time that the president's party controlled both houses. If the courts have any sense of honesty about the separation of powers, this particular designation of a national emergency will be struck down.

If the courts do not demonstrate that level of honesty, we have opened the door to any president bypassing the Constitutional authority of Congress to allocate funds on behalf of the citizens. This is another move toward the type of dictatorships that Trump admires.

My prediction is that the courts will uphold the separation of powers.

 

[Rightguide]

So, there is no compelling evidence to support that the need for a border wall is any more of a national emergency than it was during the last two times that Congress debated this subject, including the time that the president's party controlled both houses. If the courts have any sense of honesty about the separation of powers, this particular designation of a national emergency will be struck down.

If the courts do not demonstrate that level of honesty, we have opened the door to any president bypassing the Constitutional authority of Congress to allocate funds on behalf of the citizens. This is another move toward the type of dictatorships that Trump admires.

My prediction is that the courts will uphold the separation of powers.

At present we are still living under 30 Presidential national emergency orders. Don't act like this has never happened before.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...cy-30-of-them-in-fact/?utm_term=.05eddc0c729d

 

[HisArpy]

So, there is no compelling evidence to support that the need for a border wall is any more of a national emergency than it was during the last two times that Congress debated this subject, including the time that the president's party controlled both houses. If the courts have any sense of honesty about the separation of powers, this particular designation of a national emergency will be struck down.

If the courts do not demonstrate that level of honesty, we have opened the door to any president bypassing the Constitutional authority of Congress to allocate funds on behalf of the citizens. This is another move toward the type of dictatorships that Trump admires.

My prediction is that the courts will uphold the separation of powers.

Simplistic view which doesn't encompass all of the facts.

Congress DELEGATED the authority to the President to do this under the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. § 1601–1651).

Thus, the President HAS the authority to declare a National Emergency and reallocate funds under the law without violating the separation of powers doctrine.

Will the declaration be challenged in court? Most certainly. Will it succeed? Who knows. The question isn't whether the emergency is real or not. The question is whether the law which allows the President to declare the emergency is Constitutional or not.

No one knows the answer to that.

 

[HisArpy]

At present we are still living under 30 Presidential national emergency orders. Don't act like this has never happened before.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...cy-30-of-them-in-fact/?utm_term=.05eddc0c729d

Political ramification question:

What do you think happens to all of those current national emergencies if the Court strikes down the National Emergencies Act as Unconstitutional?

 

[Rightguide]

Simplistic view which doesn't encompass all of the facts.

Congress DELEGATED the authority to the President to do this under the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. § 1601–1651).

Thus, the President HAS the authority to declare a National Emergency and reallocate funds under the law without violating the separation of powers doctrine.

Will the declaration be challenged in court? Most certainly. Will it succeed? Who knows. The question isn't whether the emergency is real or not. The question is whether the law which allows the President to declare the emergency is Constitutional or not.

No one knows the answer to that.

Along with 10 USC 284 the President is on solid ground.

 

[Rightguide]

Political ramification question:

What do you think happens to all of those current national emergencies if the Court strikes down the National Emergencies Act as Unconstitutional?

Smart lawyers and others will attack the court for violating it's own "political question doctrine." Trump will pull an Andrew Jackson and tell them to enforce it. If he were to fail a 9 person oligarchy will have complete control of all three branches of government.

 

[coati]

The question isn't whether the emergency is real or not. The question is whether the law which allows the President to declare the emergency is Constitutional or not.

For allegedly being an attorney, you sure are ignorant about the salient question, which has to do with abusing the national emergency act simply to bypass Congress's authority.

 

[HisArpy]

Smart lawyers and others will attack the court for violating it's own "political question doctrine." Trump will pull an Andrew Jackson and tell them to enforce it. If he were to fail a 9 person oligarchy will have complete control of all three branches of government.

The court has been routinely doing that for the past 2 years.

My question goes more toward what happens when the existing national emergencies evaporate. Like this:

June 26, 2008: The National Emergency With Respect to Continuing Certain Restrictions with Respect to North Korea cited the risk of proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material. President Trump renewed this June 22, 2018 citing the “existence and risk of proliferation of weapons-usable fissile material on the Korean Peninsula and the actions and policies of the Government of North Korea continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat.”

Or this:

February 25, 2011: The National Emergency With Respect to Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Libya froze the assets of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

Do we let NK do what it wants now in regard with nuclear weapons? And what do we do with the money we seized from all of those (numerous) National Emergency declarations seizing foreign assets?

This isn't about "the wall" it's possibly about the entire constitutionality of a law which has been in place and being used since 1976. Either the law is constitutional or it isn't. If it is, then Trump has the power and authority to declare the emergency and reallocate the funds. If it isn't, we're in a world of butt hurt all across the political spectrum.

 

[HisArpy]

For allegedly being an attorney, you sure are ignorant about the salient question, which has to do with abusing the national emergency act simply to bypass Congress's authority.

The power is the President's. It is his to use or not use. Using that power is not "abuse".

Except to those who need something to cry about.

 

[nowisthetime]

-Failing infrastructure of America's public education system


-Increasing class income disparity

 

[cowslinger64]

The power is the President's. It is his to use or not use. Using that power is not "abuse".

Except to those who need something to cry about.

It is now.. No way the founding fathers would have wished the president using his powers to assuage his ego.. Which is all this is about...


Jeezus you guys are ignorant.

 

[Rightguide]

The court has been routinely doing that for the past 2 years.

My question goes more toward what happens when the existing national emergencies evaporate. Like this:



Or this:



Do we let NK do what it wants now in regard with nuclear weapons? And what do we do with the money we seized from all of those (numerous) National Emergency declarations seizing foreign assets?

This isn't about "the wall" it's possibly about the entire constitutionality of a law which has been in place and being used since 1976. Either the law is constitutional or it isn't. If it is, then Trump has the power and authority to declare the emergency and reallocate the funds. If it isn't, we're in a world of butt hurt all across the political spectrum.

All kidding aside I don't see the SCOTUS ruling against the President's assertion of authority in defending the border and by extension the nation from foreign aggression of any kind.

 

[Rightguide]

For allegedly being an attorney, you sure are ignorant about the salient question, which has to do with abusing the national emergency act simply to bypass Congress's authority.

You are the ignorant one.

 

[HisArpy]

It is now.. No way the founding fathers would have wished the president using his powers to assuage his ego.. Which is all this is about...

Is it?

Or is the whole thing a charade over political ideology?

As for the founding fathers; their vision has withstood the test of time. One of the core components of that vision has always been that CONGRESS passes the legislation. IF CONGRESS chooses to delegate that authority, in whole or part, that is the will of CONGRESS and within the scope of the vision of the founders.

 

[HisArpy]

All kidding aside I don't see the SCOTUS ruling against the President's assertion of authority in defending the border and by extension the nation from foreign aggression of any kind.

The lower court will. SCOTUS will reverse the injunction. As they did with the travel ban.

 

[HisArpy]

-Failing infrastructure of America's public education system


-Increasing class income disparity

These may be troubling problems (and they are) but they are not "national emergencies" because they do not threaten the security interests of the United States.

 

[Rightguide]

The lower court will. SCOTUS will reverse the injunction. As they did with the travel ban.

Justice Thomas stated the court needed to address the authority of federal district court judges outside their districts. This may be an opportunity.

Since the SCOTUS isn't subordinate to federal court rulings and the President is the equal of the SCOTUS, I don't see how a federal judge has the authority to enjoin the President in his role as CnC the first place.

 

[cowslinger64]

Is it?

Or is the whole thing a charade over political ideology?

As for the founding fathers; their vision has withstood the test of time. One of the core components of that vision has always been that CONGRESS passes the legislation. IF CONGRESS chooses to delegate that authority, in whole or part, that is the will of CONGRESS and within the scope of the vision of the founders.

Yes, it is. If you weren't such a partisan hack, you'd be able to see it. If this were Obama, you would be having a fit, and with good reason. I would agree completely.

He's using this to bypass the Senate and House.. and you think it's fine and dandy.


Same with vette, botanydummy, queball, ish, aj and the rest of the right wing dumbfucks.

 

[Rokk0n]

Rodeo clown school must have loosened the GED prerequisite for enrollment.

 

[cowslinger64]

Rodeo clown school must have loosened the GED prerequisite for enrollment.

And you are probably another alt of the idiot query. So go fuck yourself.


Remember this when a Dem president uses the national emergency for gun control. Remember how it was the right and proper thing to do. Remember when single payer finally gets put into place... or the myriad things that the left may want..


Remember your blind support for cheetolini.