Washington is careening from one crisis to another. Last night, the House and Senate passed spending and border security bills to avoid another partial government shutdown. The Hill: Here’s what made it into the compromise funding bill now on Trump’s desk. The Hill: Winners and losers in the shutdown fight. President Trump will sign the legislation this morning in the Rose Garden, but the White House says he’ll also announce an executive action - and potentially declare a national emergency - in an effort to secure additional money that Congress denied him to build miles of additional wall along the Southern border. That move will pit Trump against Democrats in Congress, as well as many Republicans, who view it as a power-grab from the legislative branch and a dangerous precedent that could be abused by future presidents. The Associated Press: Some Senate Republicans object to tapping natural disaster funds for wall construction. The Hill: GOP braces for Trump’s emergency declaration. Why is Trump doing this? The funding bill passed by Congress allocates almost $1.4 billion for a border wall. Trump wanted $5.7 billion. There is no appetite at the White House for another shutdown but Trump is under immense pressure from his right flank to deliver on his border security promises, which will be front-and-center in his 2020 reelection campaign. By declaring a national emergency, or taking some other executive action, the White House believes it can reprogram existing federal appropriations for wall construction. Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), a Trump ally, said it would be “political suicide” for Trump to sign the bill without declaring an emergency. The president’s plan to use a 35-day partial government shutdown to get his way has been a flop, according to his allies in Congress and public opinion polls, and he is looking to use the emergency declaration as new leverage in the border wall fight. Are Republicans on board with this? Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) reportedly warned Trump against this move only two weeks ago, saying it would split Republicans and likely get knocked down in the courts or by Congress. McConnell changed his tune late Thursday when there were rumors Trump might veto the spending bill and force another shutdown. But many other Republicans, including some Trump allies, still oppose the move. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said the decision is “of dubious constitutionality” and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said she didn’t think the situation at the border “should be declared a national emergency.” Republicans are also worried that a future Democratic president will declare a national emergency to overhaul the nation’s gun laws or climate change policies. Can Democrats stop Trump from doing this? Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she’s reviewing her legal options. A court challenge from congressional Democrats or from an outside liberal group is almost certain after Trump makes the announcement. Some House Democrats said Thursday they’re poised to challenge the president’s emergency declaration through a resolution of disapproval. If and when such a resolution passes the House, the GOP-controlled Senate would be required to take it up. That would spark a brutal intraparty fight among Republicans in the Senate, and McConnell has privately warned the White House that Trump could lose. The motion can’t be filibustered but it can be vetoed. The big question is — will a handful of Senate Republicans vote against the president? If they do, Trump would likely issue his first veto. The Washington Post: Emergency declaration will lead to lots of law suits. What does the law say about declaring a national emergency? According to the Congressional Research Service, a national emergency to build a border wall would “raise a variety of novel legal issues” that could potentially go either way. Among the factors a judge would consider: “(1) the circumstances in which conditions along the border rise to the level of a “national emergency” that “requires use of the armed forces,” and the circumstances in which military construction is “necessary to support such use of the armed forces”; (2) the meaning of the term “military construction” in the MCCA; (3) how a court would review different segments of border wall construction; and (4) the relationship between military construction authorities and various other federal laws and constitutional considerations that shape the manner in which federal agencies carry out construction projects.” The New York Times: National emergency powers and the border wall, explained. ABC News: Justice Department warns White House national emergency will be blocked temporarily. Perspectives and analysis UC-Berkeley law professor John Yoo, speaking during a Federalist Society podcast on Jan. 31 (transcript): “The Supreme Court has never overruled a presidential finding of a national emergency under the [1978 National Emergencies Act] statute. In fact, every time it’s confronted it after 1978, it’s upheld it. … I think it sounds like when … President Trump issues a national emergency declaration and then he transfers these funds, politically, everybody will like it because Trump will get a large part of his wall. Congress will get to criticize him for it and then move on to other business. And I think, in the end, the courts will defer and not second guess, substitute their judgment for what is the national emergency.” Peter H. Schuck: The real problem with Trump’s national emergency plan. Jeffrey Toobin: Trump plans to invoke emergency powers to build border wall. Eugene Robinson: We have a national emergency all right. Its name is Trump. The New York Times editorial board: A Trump-made emergency. Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.): Trump is being forced into declaring a national emergency. |
No comments:
Post a Comment