Jump to content
ChesterCopperpot1

Senate votes to block Trump’s “National Emergency”

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, begooode said:

Pretty hard to call the southern border situation a national emergency OR say Trump's action is considered within executive scope when 1 out of 5  repubs go on record to disagree in today's hyper-partisan political environment.

 

There really isn't a lawful definition of what an Emergency is. Basically, it is up to the Executive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Justafan   
3 minutes ago, 9 Nines said:

In the 1970s when it first passed, it was concurrent and it was amended in mid 1980s to be joint. 

 

Here and this also answers my question about why it was changed:

 

It originally allowed Congress to end an emergency by concurrent resolution (that is, if majorities in both houses voted to end it). But in 1983, the Supreme Court declared this sort of legislative veto over presidential action unconstitutional. A 1985 amendment to the act now requires a joint resolution to end the emergency, meaning that any Congressional vote to end the emergency is subject to the president’s veto, which may be overridden only by two-thirds majorities of both houses.

 

https://www.lawfareblog.com/emergencies-without-end-primer-federal-states-emergency

Yea, but there was another element that's missing.  They discussed all of this.  I'm too lazy to look it back up.  Whatever. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Btowner said:

Too many Trump supporters cannot comprehend a person can support border security while believing a wall is a dumb idea or this is a faux national emergency. It's nuts.

None of those GOP (exception of Murkowskis or Collins who I haven't read their reasoning yet) who opposed deny there is an Emergency on the border.

 

There is no way to deny there is an emergency and we are being invaded. As a matter of fact, if I were Trump, I would completely shut the southern border and halt all immigration until it is satisfactorly fixed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 Nines   

Something of note I read recently, the law allows the President Emergency Declaration to be challenged every 6 months.  So unless President Trump ends this national emergency, the House can start the process over every 6 months, forcing the Senate to make this same vote every 6 months, which would put Senate republicans, many more running for reelection in 2020 than Democrats, under much pressure.   Many will have to decide if that want to upset general election voters (vote against the resolution, supporting Trump), or anger Republican primary voters, risking a challenge (vote for the resolution.)  Also, if any weigh one group more a risk than the other, if they change their vote on later resolutions, acts of them vote flip-flopping might be worse. 

 

Reports are that Senate Republicans are trying to come-up with some way to get Trump money for the wall, outside his emergency, so he can end it to keep the 6 months vote processes from happening.    They were huddling together on a plan this week but it fell apart yesterday. 

Edited by 9 Nines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Justafan said:

Now comes the constitutional argument over whether Trump has the authority to veto this.  

 

It's a pretty interesting debate.  There are several lines of thought on this and a veto could get challenged in court.  I have no idea how solid the legal arguments are but I heard a great debate on this on a podcast a couple of weeks ago.  

There is no debate, read the law. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Starkiller said:

In the end, the Supreme Court is going to be the one to decide if a president has the power to override the federal budget written by Congress and just apply money to any project he wants.

 

And if they back Trump, the whole system of checks and balances has failed.

 

Allocation of monies post Emergency declaration is pretty straight forward in law. Have any of you actually read the law or are you just watching Leftist talking heads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 Nines   

 

2 minutes ago, ben4titans said:

There is no debate, read the law. 

While debating, person X declares there is no debate.  Later that day, a man watching television declares he doesn't watch television. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, reo said:

What this ends up being is a check on the constitutionality of the law allowing the president to declare a national emergency. 

 

Essentially the law needs to be struck down until it more clearly defines what constitutes a national emergency. 

 

For once @reois partially right. Good luck getting the Left to take power from the Executive. This would easily pass the Senate and likely the House, if the Dems are on board.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 9 Nines said:

 

While debating, person X declares there is no debate.  Later that day, a man watching television declares he doesn't watch television. 

 

I'm not debating the question of if the President can veto. That is fully settled. Quit misrepresenting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rogue   
14 minutes ago, ben4titans said:

 

Nothing unconstitutional about what Trump is doing. The Constitutional thing to do would be tighten/abolish the Emergency Powers legislation. Of course the Left won't do that, because they usually benefit from Executive power.

 

But do tell, how is it Unconstitutional?

I didn't say it was Unconstitutional.  It's not even mentioned in the Constitution.  However, it is specific in saying Congress appropriates funds, and it doesn't say the executive can go all grade school and appropriate funds because he lost the legislative fight.  

 

Now does it?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Justafan   
11 minutes ago, 9 Nines said:

Something of note I read recently, the law can be challenged every 6 months.  So unless President Trump ends this national emergency, the House can start the process over every 6 months, forcing the Senate to make this same vote every 6 months, which would put Senate republicans, many mote running for reelection in 2020 than Democrats, under much pressure.   Many will have to decide if that want to upset general election voters (vote against the resolution, supporting Trump), or anger Republican primary voters, risking a challenge (vote for the resolution.)  Also, if any weigh one group mote a risk than the other, if they change their vote on later resolutions, acts of them vote flip-flopping might be worse. 

 

Reports are that Senate Republicans are trying to come-up with some way to get Trump money for the wall, outside his emergency, so he can end it to keep the 6 months vote processes from happening.    They were huddling together on a plan this week but it fell apart yesterday. 

There's also the imminent domain issues and the contractor's complaints.  These funds have already been allocated to contractors and accounted for.  Most of the new construction would occur on now held private property.

 

Even if Trump managed to win the eventual court case, they will hold pass injunctions and it will all get held up long enough that he runs out of time.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Justafan   
11 minutes ago, 9 Nines said:

 

While debating, person X declares there is no debate.  Later that day, a man watching television declares he doesn't watch television. 

Ben's an idiot.  There is no debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 Nines   

Look at Senator Tillis.  He recently wrote an op-ed piece, in the Washington Post,  highlighting how bad Trump's declaration was and how unconstitutional and an act of executive power grab it was.   Something that likely angered Trump supporters in his state.   Then a week later says he is undecided, then today votes against the resolution, in favor of Trump, likely angering people against the declaration.   So in the span of two weeks, he just angered all his constituents.  Plus his opponent can label him a flip-flopper too.   And again, he might have to go through that Keystone Cops act a few more times before the 2020 election. 

 

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/03/14/thom-tillis-trump-emergency-wall-border-rebuke-vote-nr-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/this-week-in-politics/

 

“Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) took every possible position on President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency to build a wall along the Mexican border,” the Washington Postreports.

 

“At first, Tillis stood defiantly against Trump’s usurpation of congressional prerogative, declaring in a Washington Post op-ed almost two weeks ago that approving the emergency would ‘justify providing the executive with more ways to bypass Congress.'”

 

“Then, over the last week, as political pressure mounted, Tillis moved into the undecided column in hope of a compromise with Trump… By Thursday afternoon, as 12 GOP colleagues broke ranks with the president, Tillis instead fell in line.”

Edited by 9 Nines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...