Eet Ees Ill-Eagle to Have De Boarder!
Dees Eees Ahr Land!
Posted on 04/03/2020 11:02:54 AM PDT by BeauBo
President Donald Trump was within his constitutional authority to declare a national emergency at the southern border last year, a federal judge ruled Thursday, but environmental groups can move forward on a central challenge in their lawsuit: whether the president can divert $3.6 billion in military funds to build a border wall.
The environmental groups, which include the Center for Biological Diversity and the Rio Grande International Study Center, each filed lawsuits arguing Trump abused his authority by reallocating money from military construction accounts to fund a southern border wall without congressional approval... In allowing the environmental groups to proceed with their cut-back challenge, U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden ruled the Trump administration’s border wall funding arrangement violated the 2019 Consolidated Appropriations Act, the budget passed by Congress allocating money for construction of a border wall in the Rio Grande Valley.
But McFadden, a Trump appointee, dismissed their claims alleging the president’s actions were unconstitutional, and their challenge to the president’s emergency declaration that he used to secure border wall funding under the guise of stopping drug trafficking into the U.S.
“These policy decisions are for the political, not judicial, branches to resolve,” McFadden wrote in his 59-page opinion. The judge also dismissed Trump as a defendant in the litigation since his presence isn’t necessary for the environmental groups to obtain relief against agency officials.
(Excerpt) Read more at courthousenews.com ...
Last Summer, the Supreme Court ruled to allow the Administration to continue contracting and building with this money, while the lawsuit's wind their way through the courts - and continue to wind they do...
We are still waiting for this year's (FY20) MILCON money to be released for contracting (about another $3.6 billion). That will be huge.
This year's (FY20) Counter-Narcotics money from DoD ($3.8 billion) has already been released, and some has already been put on contract (contract mod to SWVC in the Tucson Sector, raising that contract to 88 total miles).
Hopefully, the China Cough Pandemic will not impede the contracting process - they have a mountain of money that needs to be put to work.
I’d like to know what standing any of these groups have to sue over diversion of military funds. They are not harmed by the diversion.
They could sue over wildlife issues, because the congress gave that right in some environmental laws. But that lawsuit would have to be about whether a wall could be built, NOT about how it is funded.
I suppose a military contractor could sue for the diversion, if they could show that they had a reasonable chance of winning money for some project, but now they were not able to do so because the money was diverted. But nobody is suing on that point.
A taxpayer probably couldn’t sue, because while the money is being diverted, he isn’t spending money that wasn’t already slated to be spent, so the taxpayer is not harmed.
Courts have really destroyed the whole concept of “standing to sue”
Hummm. Trump appointment.
Eet Ees Ill-Eagle to Have De Boarder!
Dees Eees Ahr Land!
Isn’t the wall a national defense structure?
As a national defense structure, isn’t its funding and construction a military matter?
Are not Marines and Army troops now patrolling the border? (Ans: Yes, they are.)
Weren’t the military funds taken from military line items for construction?
I am absolutely certain that POTUS conferred with his lawyers and with Military JAGs to clear legal hurdles before his order to fund the Wall using military construction line items.
This lawsuit is a nuisance and is plainly Anti-American.
is there ANYTHING that a judge Can’t do at this point?
Can we just get a judge to order the Corona virus to stop?
Actually I think the judge is on our side. He ruled the President was within his authority to declare a national emergency for the Wall construction.
But he said he will hear arguments concerning moving money from military construction to Wall construction.
Why?
He sees the other side will appeal, perhaps he sees they have weak arguments. Their pleadings can be flushed out in his court, and they will die on appeal if they ever appeal.
An appeal is not a retrial, it a review of whether the court followed the law or not or refused material to be admissible that could have helped the losing side.
Abused. Not exceeded, abused. The plaintiffs are trying to set the grounds for another impeachment if their lawsuit prevails.
Good post.
Follow the money...who is supporting/funding these groups?
“I’d like to know what standing any of these groups have to sue over diversion of military funds.”
Among other things, this recent ruling addressed standing. (This is the same judge who previously ruled against the House of Representatives having standing, in a similar case).
The judge ruled that a Latino group lacked standing, and they were removed from the suit. He determined that an “Indian Group” (not a Federally recognized tribe) had a plausible claim of standing. Significantly, he accepted standing of environmental groups, based on some language in the 2019 Appropriations bill, which expressed an intent to protect the environment.
“This lawsuit is a nuisance and is plainly Anti-American.”
and we are one vote away in the Supreme Court, from these types of end runs being successful.
It would be a very different situation, if Hillary Clinton had been elected.
How close we came...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.