Trump to declare national emergency to build border wall

Clearly not giving a damn?

 

?? um . . . okay, if you say so.

 

Who are these "open border" folks? I have yet to meet someone who supports that, and I do happen to know many people.

 

its funny because alot of bozos in this thread dont even know the history of american imperialism in Latin america in the 1990s and 1980s.

 

a timely tweet from the troller-in-chief honestly, if Dems/libs/whoevers don't think this is at least a little funny, I don't know what to say to you

 

I think we are on the same page when it comes to asylum seekers …. I want them to have their cases heard BUT I want that done in a timely manner and should they be rejected I don't want the process of removal being the impossibility it is currently.


Ask yourself one question - If these people are really just seeking asylum then why are they entering the country thru any means other than a legal point of entry.
The answer to that is a simple one - they just want in and if they can get in illegally great , if not they have this asylum claim to fall back on.
BP catches them …. they give up and claim asylum. BP doesn't catch them …. they are all but free to do as they please.

Our resources at the border are overwhelmed by the sheer volume of wanting immigrants and asylum seekers. I'm gonna link another post by my BP friend from the Texans forum …. and ask yourself why if we are overwhelmed is there a provision in that bi-partisan bill to REDUCE the amount of space we have to house these people while they are awaiting hearings ….

Now realize that any who come as "Family units" are immediately released with nothing more than a notice to appear. They only hold single adults or Unaccompanied children.

 

Stat of the day: Can you believe it? mexicans are now using tricks to murder. they'll get two hot brunette babes in daisy dukes riding motorcycles. Who doesn't like that? Then those 2 mexican babes with tremendous legs, like Miss Venezuela 1995 before she got faaat!?, will start squeezing an uzi killing everyone. BUILD THAT WALL!
By the way some guy named greg killed 5 in Aurora but hey Emergencies.

 

Congress paved the way for Trump to take this action:

How Congress and President Obama Made Trump’s Wall Possible
By Josh Blackman
Friday, February 15, 2019, 3:10 PM

​

Throughout the 2016 election, Donald Trump campaigned for president on the promise that he would build a wall along the southern border. Six weeks after his election in November 2016, Congress overwhelmingly passed a statute—codified as 10 U.S.C § 284—that authorized the secretary of defense to support the “construction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States.” On Dec. 23, 2016, a month before leaving office, President Obama signed the 973-page bill into law without any objection to this provision.

Today, the Trump administration has invoked this express statutory delegation of authority to do what the statute says: “construct ... fences ... across international boundaries of the United States.” Specifically, the president identified up to $2.5 billion under the Department of Defense funds that were designated for counterdrug activities. This provision does not turn on the declaration of a national emergency pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2808, which the president also invoked in a proclamationissued today. Critically, the White House stated that “these funding sources will be used sequentially and as needed.” The “emergency” funds may not be tapped till the other, less controversial funds are depleted. Plaintiffs may not have standing to challenge the diversion of “emergency” funds till those funds are in fact allocated. Through § 284, both Houses of Congress willingly gave President Trump a path to build at least part of the wall.

This episode illustrates how Congress has long ago relinquished its lawmaking powers. The legislature enacts omnibus bills that few members actually read. Often, these super-duper-statutes contain nearly-limitless delegations of authority to the executive branch, with only the flimsiest guidelines of how and when that authority should be executed. Other times, Congress gives the president the exact authority he needs, with few strings attached. Such is the case with §284: Obama signed a bill into law that gave his successor the very precise power to “construct . . . fences . . . across international boundaries of the United States.” Moreover, a predecessor of this statute, known commonly as Section 1004, has been in effect since 1990. Critically, other longstanding provisions allow the president to shift appropriations around to fund that construction.

Trump’s decision to rely on § 284 reflects, once again, an instance where he relies on express delegations of power to accomplish awful policies. Congress cannot claim that the president is subverting the rule of law when it gives him the precise authority he needs to accomplish his goal. In January 2017, Democratic Senator Jack Reed said that Congress could block the president from relying on this statute to fund the fence—and certainly that could work prospectively. But Congress is responsible for enacting this statute in the first place.

This executive order isn’t the first instance in which Trump has relied on express statutory authority to implement a terrible policy. For example, in Trump v. Hawaii, the Supreme Court found that 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) authorized the president to implement the travel ban. This statute provided, in part, that the president could deny entry to “aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States” that he deems would be “detrimental to the interests of the United States.” Some lower court judges found that this broad statute violated the non-delegation doctrine. At the time, I argued that precedent foreclosed this argument: five decades ago, the Supreme Court recognized that the president has inherent authority to exclude aliens. This delegation placed Trump in Justice Robert Jackson’s first Youngstown tier. Trump v. Hawaii did not need to reach this issue. Justice Clarence Thomas did, though though I have doubts about whether his opinion is correct as an original matter. If Congress is not pleased with President Trump’s use of Section 1182(f), it should modify the statute. (I hope it does so in the future.)

Like Obama, Trump turned to executive action after Congress refused to legislate his preferred agenda—but beyond that, Trump’s policies contrast with several of Obama’s most prominent executive actions. For example, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) programs did not stand on express delegations of authority. Rather, the Department of Homeland Security relied on an executive practice known as “deferred action,” and two general statutes. 6 U.S.C. § 202(5) states, “the Secretary shall be responsible for . . . establishing national immigration enforcement policies and priorities.” 8 U.S.C. § 1103(a) states, in part, “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall be charged with the administration and enforcement of this chapter and all other laws relating to the immigration and naturalization of aliens.” Were the president to rely solely on these statutes, as I’ve argued, DAPA would violate the non-delegation doctrine.

The same cannot be said for 10 U.S.C § 284. Congress wittingly enacted a statute that allowed Trump to do what he had promised to do. Not even a robust application of the non-delegation doctrine—which I favor—would provide a basis to challenge this exercise of authority. Under modern doctrine, the new executive policy is well within the bounds of Congress’s power to delegate authority.

Ultimately, I fault Trump for pursuing this unfortunate policy. But I place greater blame on Congress, which long ago stopped enforcing its legislative powers. Peter Schuck accurately summarized the situation: “By failing to define crucial terms, legal standards and accountability rules, Congress has handed presidents an all-too-handy tool of tyranny commonly used by autocrats.” Until Congress does its job, the courts will be unable to restore the separation of powers.

Josh Blackman is an Associate Professor at the South Texas College of Law Houston, and the author of Unraveled: Obamacare, Religious Liberty, and Executive Power.
​

https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-congress-and-president-obama-made-trumps-wall-possible

 

exactly his "stats" are that ^

 

It's depressing that it's forgotten. It Should be a major focus in jr high and h.s books. Honduras coup even happened under Obama's watch in 2009.

 

I must be out or..............

 

I know it's hard to keep track with your frantic Bobby-level pace of posting.

 

Os, whether you believe it or not, we are in the middle of a national crisis precipitated by trump's declaration of a national emergency in order to fulfill a campaign promise to his base. No emergency exists and his action is unprecedented. I just don't find any of it funny.

 

fair enough

 

To be fair it isn't even a campaign promise since the promise was that Mexico would pay for the wall.

 

That Mexico would "pay" for his wall was always an enabler, a way to get it built for "free." The real campaign promise was the wall itself, FB, in my opinion. Unsurprisingly, trump is handling it like the self-absorbed egomaniac he is, ignoring the damage he is doing to the country.

 

no public appetite for ending prohibition (my preference), so walling/militarizing the border is imperative

 

You mean... Dems/whoevers like yourself, right? ... I mean, correct? (sorry, the "right" slipped out.)

 

Stay safe people, u should stock up and stay inside. It's a national emergency, Mexico could invade us any second now.