US President Trump Declares National Emergency to Fund His Wall

[Pontifex Maximus]

This was not the right way to go about getting funding for the wall, and with all the legal challenges he still may not get it. That being said, with all the outrage on the left, I wonder if they don't regret just giving him the 5.7 billion. I mean, how much federal money was just wasted on the failed California high speed rail? The writing was always on the wall, and the democrats refused to negotiate. Still, awful precedent being set.

[irontaino]

Trump is simply getting things done - it's what he was elected to do. He should be praised for his bravery.

https://politics.theonion.com/trump-...ons-1832659448

We don't deserve The Onion.

Aside from the legal challenges from the state's, a lot of private landowners will be quite pissed about their land being appropriated by eminent domain and there's at least one large reservation that has gone on record since Trump made the campaign promis saying they wouldn't cooperate on any wall. The smaller rezzes along the border will likely follow suit.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Well nobody is ever happy about their land being taken, but out of every issue that is the most settled issue of debacle. The only question about it I have is the issue of separation of powers on takings, it's not an area I'm familiar with. As far as reservations, their land is being held in trust by the federal government anyway, so just compensation should apply to that as well. I could very well be wrong but that's my best guess at this point.

[NorseThing]

Abit of hair pulling n perhaps overstated drama here and in the media. The President deems this to be an emergency and thus is is an emergency. If you or I claim it i a fake emergency, that does not change Presidential powers on his deeming it an emergency. If you really think this is outrageous, then start by reading wiki and look at the linked footnotes and so on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emergencies_Act

Pres. TRump was honest by stating before the spending bill came to his desk, that this was an option. Congress thought otherwise and much of this was probably created by the Democrats snipping a bit here and there from the spending bill. Like the number of cots that are to be at the disposal for border security. These little details do add up, but it was not the cutting to save money. It was cutting by Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats in the US House to show who was in charge. Well, they found out that the President is pretty mush the chief executive officer and the leader of the military. You will note where he is getting the funding -- this was positioned as a national security issue.

Before Trump's announcement in the Rose Garden, a senior administration official explained that the money will be pulled from the following areas:

• $1.375 billion from the Homeland Security appropriations bill
• $600 million from the Treasury Department's drug forfeiture fund
• $2.5 billion from the Department of Defense's drug interdiction program
• $3.6 billion from the Department of Defense's military construction account

The $1.375 billion, which is part of a spending bill passed by Congress, is short of the $5.7 billion that Trump had asked for late last year but didn't get. A fight over the barrier money led to a record-long partial government shutdown that was resolved after 35 days. What's more, the $1.375 billion would specifically not allow construction of new wall prototypes proposed by Trump, and would instead put money toward 55 miles of bollard fencing.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/15/here...come-from.html

Even NBC saw that the Democrats want nothing to fund any new wall in the spending bill. Blame Trump all you want guys. I blame the Democrats. We had a shut down and not the Democrats will run to lawyers to stop what is probably a Presidential power that has been repeated used over the years, The lawyers will argue about the for and not the substance of the declaration. Trump gets his wall (whether this is a good use or not of the money spent)and the Democrats are just running crazy that they are not in charge.

In the matter of the border wall, Congress could not have been more clear where it was heading. It put itself on the path to institutional irrelevancy, and it has finally arrived. I do not agree there is a national emergency on the southern border, but I do believe President Trump will prevail. This crisis is not the making of Donald Trump. This is the making of Congress.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...the-wall-fight

Note to Democrats: Trump is elected the president. Get over it. We have elections every four years. The clock is already running on the next election cycle. If you do not like it, get in the line and run for office. Plenty of Democrats are already lining up.

[The spartan]

Abit of hair pulling n perhaps overstated drama here and in the media. The President deems this to be an emergency and thus is is an emergency. If you or I claim it i a fake emergency, that does not change Presidential powers on his deeming it an emergency.

You really don't get why this sets a harmful precedent, do you? There was once upon a time where the US was not at war until Congressional representatives said so. Its these little democratic checks that are being picked away at, here, and you seem A-ok with that. And I am sure you wont complain in the slightest when a Democrat POTUS declares a national emergency to accomplish their pet project.

You are basically saying it is ok because "this is how politics works now" while not also admitting it is a bad thing. Like, that is next level partisan hackery right there; it comes off as if you just want dictator-like powers for "your side".

[NorseThing]

This is not a harmful precedent. It is not even a precedent. IF the Democrat wants to declare a national emergency of national security grounds and not on some wild fantasy involving global warming or Martians landing in upstate New York or on a Connecticut farm -- well I would need to see the declaration. The Trump Declaration is not a 'what if' scenario. Almost every politician in Congress has a nest of pet projects. Is this a problem somehow different from the other pet projects?

[The spartan]

This is not a harmful precedent. It is not even a precedent. IF the Democrat wants to declare a national emergency of national security grounds and not on some wild fantasy involving global warming or Martians landing in upstate New York or on a Connecticut farm -- well I would need to see the declaration. The Trump Declaration is not a 'what if' scenario.

The declaration wouldn't matter at the point, by your own admission there is nothing to justify to you or the public. You really can't take a guess at where this will lead down the line? Are you just being willfully blind?

Almost every politician in Congress has a nest of pet projects. Is this a problem somehow different from the other pet projects?

Yes, other projects aren't funding by siphoning military money without the permission of congress. I mean, seriously dude, your posts here are just dripping with bad faith. What are the chances you would be arguing this if the POTUS were a Democrat pushing their pet project? Are you really that much of an apologist?

[NorseThing]

Really! I think you need to take a visit to your local politician and see what gets funneled before even writing the bills. This is simply a case of funneling after the bill. It is done all the time. Look at the history of the national emergencies. I already suggested you look at the footnotes of the wiki article. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/98-505.pdf is a link from 2007 so this is clearly not a precedent.

Now we can all have opinions on whether this is a good call by President Trump or a bad call. But it is his call to make as the President.

[Muizer]

Really! I think you need to take a visit to your local politician and see what gets funneled before even writing the bills. This is simply a case of funneling after the bill. It is done all the time. Look at the history of the national emergencies. I already suggested you look at the footnotes of the wiki article. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/98-505.pdf is a link from 2007 so this is clearly not a precedent.

Now we can all have opinions on whether this is a good call by President Trump or a bad call. But it is his call to make as the President.

Do you really think these "emergency powers" were created with situations like the Mexican border in mind? Or are you saying 'whatever the original idea was, that ship has sailed'. Are you saying it is incorrect to label this abuse of powers or are you saying the Democrats are guilty of selective indignation?

[Azorica]

Really! I think you need to take a visit to your local politician and see what gets funneled before even writing the bills. This is simply a case of funneling after the bill. It is done all the time. Look at the history of the national emergencies. I already suggested you look at the footnotes of the wiki article. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/98-505.pdf is a link from 2007 so this is clearly not a precedent.

Now we can all have opinions on whether this is a good call by President Trump or a bad call. But it is his call to make as the President.

If you see the list of times emergency powers were used, it was mostly to freeze or arrest assets of certain individuals, countries or investments. My rudimentary knowledge of US law makes me believe that it because it a faster way to impose sanctions and restrictions and it by principle based on a certain moderation. However as far I know, no president has used emergency powers to circumvent Congress on funding massive projects. Since the US functions on common law, it emphasizes precedence to apply law and resolve disputes based on it, it opens up a dangerous precedent.

If he manages to successfully navigate through courts with this, the genie is out of a bottle and is a matter of time until other presidents are tempted and do the same, particularly as the concept of national emergency is rather vague.

Imagine the next president says greenhouse gases are a national concern, therefore we must cover the Nevada Desert with solar panels to de-carbonize the economy. Since it is obvious a dumb and prohibitively expensive plan, Congress rejects funding and he goes full "national emergency" to circumvent the legislative body and soon enough the Nevada Desert has the most solar panels per sq mile in the world because the president said so and funded through other means and points out previous presidents did the same. The judicial is powerless against that claim and everyone goes bananas on social media, goods times will be had and some people will be royally pissed off. And justifiably so.

[PointOfViewGun]

Is this emergency about a security crisis along the Mexican border? Or is it about unfilled holes in Mar-a-Lago?

[Heathen Hammer]

I don't see why strengthening border security shouldn't require funding. Sure does require it more then spending trillions on "importing" democracy or on "aid" to unstable and unreliable "allies" in Middle East.

[Gaidin]

Is this emergency about a security crisis along the Mexican border? Or is it about unfilled holes in Mar-a-Lago?

It's about Trump not liking the power of the purse.

[Heathen Hammer]

Its about Trump ... doing his job.

[Mayer]

You can't ignore that the president is trying to fulfill his election promise.
Trump was voted on a "build the wall" platform, and he seems to want that wall.

Now or never is the time for a impeachment.

It's not going to happen. Never is the right choice of words.

[irontaino]

Is this emergency about a security crisis along the Mexican border? Or is it about unfilled holes in Mar-a-Lago?

It's an expensive temper tantrum.

[Pontifex Maximus]

It's an expensive temper tantrum.

It's really not that expensive and what rhetoric leads you to believe it is a temper tantrum?

[Heathen Hammer]

It's an expensive temper tantrum.

Funding required to build the wall is but a small drop, compared to the ocean of taxpayer spending on "export of democracy" and foreign aid to useless and unstable "allies". It is quite interesting how Democrats, who typically tend to lead a very expensive pro-war foreign policy are all of a sudden concerned over a comparatively small amount of funds to be spent on improving border security. Sounds like partisan temper tantrum on behalf of Democrats to me.

[B. W.]

This 2014 article will tell you all you need to know about the President's ability to declare a national emergency:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ency/16851775/

[irontaino]

It's really not that expensive

This, coupled with the shutdown and the legal fees that will no doubt go to defending this retarded move.

and what rhetoric leads you to believe it is a temper tantrum?

Baby didn't get his way, so now he's trying to circumvent congress with a fake emergency. Not only does this reek of temper tantrum, but also of authoritarian style power grab. His announcement was even more rambling and incoherent than usual, plus ignoring facts and statistics to push his pretend emergency.

Funding required to build the wall is but a small drop, compared to the ocean of taxpayer spending on "export of democracy" and foreign aid to useless and unstable "allies". It is quite interesting how Democrats, who typically tend to lead a very expensive pro-war foreign policy are all of a sudden concerned over a comparatively small amount of funds to be spent on improving border security. Sounds like partisan temper tantrum on behalf of Democrats to me.

Trump literally could have had his wall funding at anytime before Democrats came in. It's not their fault Trump is incompetent.