Posted on 02/16/2019 7:37:32 AM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
Democratic lawmakers, states and others mulling legal challenges to President Donald Trump's national emergency declaration to obtain funds to build a U.S.-Mexico border wall face an uphill and probably losing battle in a showdown likely to be decided by the conservative-majority Supreme Court, legal experts said.
After being rebuffed by the U.S. Congress in his request for $5.7 billion to help build the wall that was a signature 2016 campaign promise, Trump on Friday invoked emergency powers given to the president under a 1976 law. The move, according to the White House, enables Trump to bypass lawmakers and redirect money already appropriated by Congress for other purposes and use it for wall construction.
Peter Shane, a professor at Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law, said challenges to the emergency declaration could end up as a replay of the legal battle against Trump's travel ban targeting people from several Muslim-majority nations. The Supreme Court last year upheld the travel ban after lower courts had ruled against Trump, with the justices giving the president deference on immigration and national security issues.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Trump is playing a winning hand and Nancy and Chuck know it.
'Experts expect Trump to prevail in legal challenges to emergency declaration'
FReepers wanting to avoid MSN, a terrific idea, can use this direct link to Reuters:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-shutdown-challenges-legal-idUSKCN1Q500D
If DACA can not be stopped or overturn...
Trump’s travel ban targeting people from several Muslim-majority nations.
...
The ban was on countries that didn’t have the resources to do background checks. The media is below scum.
Obama Declared 13 National Emergencies — 11 Are Still Active
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/obama-declared-13-national-emergencies-11-are-still-active/
Unfortunate that it has to go through the 'do-whatever-is-necessary-to-stymie-Trump' court system before it lands in a court where *some* of the justices pay attention to Constitutional matters...
Drawing money from multiple sources is brilliant because they have to block him every one of them to cut off funds. Trump has the $1.4B to get stared with, plus whatever he can get elsewhere. Some may take court challenges but as long as he has at least one funding source he can keep building wall.
I don’t expect Trump to take just the 8 billion. If I were him I would go after the whole enchilada. If you have a winning hand, and you have access to as much money as you need, why settle?
If the 9th Circuit judges were not phony activists in robes they would reject the lawsuit as unnecessary. The Emergencies Act clearly defines how the legislative branch can overturn any executive branch action through a simple majority vote. This is a strictly legislative matter and should not involve the courts at all. The point of the lawsuits is to obstruct and delay any action by this president until the 2020 elections and the courts should not go along with this political scheme. Don’t hold your breath.
This little drama will be a clear demonstration of the concept of the law in the minds of Liberals. They believe that the law exists to ensure that Liberals get their way, a concept perfectly understood by every 2 year old on the Planet. Most of us grow into a more realistic view.
“Legal challenges to Trump emergency declaration face uphill battle”
This might be true were it not for the fact that the Fed Courts are infested with Rat hacks. Trump has been on very solid ground and shot down repeatedly. The cause is way more important then the rule of law to these bastards.
Using Drug Interdiction money seems logical as that’s one of the Wall construction objectives.
The dems are stuck in a holding pattern. It is not ripe and no harm has been done yet. Until Trump starts spending that emergency based money they have no standing. He has a lot of money he can spend before he gets to that point.
The truth is the U.S. had declared states of emergencies on issues far less critical to U.S. interests than what we currently face and everyone knows it. Anybody that says otherwise, including 7th Circus judges, are merely filled with Trump hatred and that is all that guides them.
“He has a lot of money he can spend before he gets to that point.”
Fine except he just signed a bill in which he agreed that he would only build a fence in a specific 55 miles in TX any portion of which can be blocked by a Rat mayor in the path. It forbids any actual wall in any other area and he signed it. How do think the courts would view that?
Pelosi....."Not $1 for a wall" and
Schumer gloating at the end of the shutdown that the President got nothing for his wall...."I hope the President learned his lesson".
15 days later...the President got 1.375 billion dollars for a wall.
Trump was smart. He sat the committee down with real live experts....not the usual media biased picks.
They listened and gave the President a down payment.
The shame of it is that no matter who is on the USSC the law is the law and it should not matter what persuasion you are politically. We all know that is not the case though since the SC has interpreted the law as they see fit.
How can it be unlawful to uphold the law? This should never be in question. Trump mentioned lawlessness and he is of course correct. We just never expected the lawlessness to be in the congress and senate or on both sides of the aisle.
Trump should tell the judiciary they have no standing. According to the code congress can override. Judges should also refuse to hear cases challenging national emergency declarations. You can run an emergency response by judicial fiat of 1 judge or a 3-judge panel.
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.