Posted on 05/23/2019 6:07:57 PM PDT by NRx
A U.S. judge on Thursday sharply challenged a House lawsuit to block construction of President Trumps border wall after a senior Justice Department attorney said Congress cannot sue to enforce its constitutional power of the purse and that courts should stay out of political disputes between branches of government.
The Democratic-led House filed suit in Washington on April 5 to prevent work after Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) accused the administration of stealing from appropriated funds by seeking to transfer $6.7 billion more for the effort than the $1.375 billion Congress approved, a shift of money from other projects lawmakers authorized.
Trump declared a national emergency in February to redirect mostly military-designated funding for the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border after losing a grueling two-month fight over fully paying for it that prompted a government shutdown.
But over nearly three hours of arguments, U.S. District Judge Trevor N. McFadden of the District said there were few cases to guide how courts should rule on a major test of the constitutional separation of powers, and pressed House general counsel Douglas Letter to point to historical precedent allowing one chamber of Congress to sue the president to settle political differences.
Whether the House has legal standing to sue is problematic and a significant issue in this case, said McFadden, citing the bedrock legal requirement that a party prove it is being harmed and show that only a court can address it. Courts are not there to adjudicate just interesting constitutional or political questions between the branches, he added later.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
No jurisdiction is the only ruling lawful.
1. no path in the Constitution for one branch to sue another for political reasons
2. Congress already has tools/mechanisms besides using courts
3. only one branch of Congress vs Admin - no standing
4. Congress has alternately denied and then allowed authority for Trump to move funds. Can’t act bi-polar.
The House can act constitutionally and impeach, the Senate may not agree.... that’s the way the game is played.
You’d think the House knows the rules as laid out in the Constitution. Then again....
So, what’s the upshot?
Did he make a decision, or just have a brilliant argument?
For the House Democrats, a fruitless impeachment is likely to be a political fiasco and dead weight in the 2020 election. Pelosi knows that, but many in her caucus are already invested in the effort.
Thanks for your excellent and clear post/reply!
Wow. Im surprised Pelousy et al. werent able to shop this to a leftist, activist judge. The Dims are really slipping. (Of course, with more Trump appointees on the courts now, I suppose it isnt as easy for the Dims to forum shop as they used to.)
Fortunately, for our side and our President, it isn’t as easy as it used to be for the Rats to shop for liberal judges.
Exactly. Funds are authorized to be reutilized under certain POTUS determined circumstances. Getting a court to do something about it (the law) is less politically risky than impeachment and no conviction... The sentient Dems know this.
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.