Trump: I could declare a national emergency to get border wall

[Damocles]

If you read the act, Congress can declare that emergency over by passing a joint resolution. If Trump declares such an emergency, Congress can quickly end it. If one House of Congress passes a resolution to end it, the other house is required to send it to committee and within 15 days report it to the floor where it becomes the order of business which means leadership can't prevent a vote. It looks like the maximum time frame for Congress to act to overturn any emergency declaration is 36 days from the first introduction of such a resolution. Every member of Congress is going to be on record before it ever makes it to the courts. I don't see a majority being willing to agree it is a national emergency if they hope to be reelected.

Yup. Hence the reason I stated they passed the act. To gain some control and to set an expiration. At the time one of the emergency acts from Roosevelt in 1933 was still in effect, there was no expiration, until 1976.

[Damocles]

The act also sets an expiration, if it isn't renewed by the President each year it expires. It is, IMO, a decent law. It allows for emergency action, shuts down overreach, and expires what was permanent in the past if nobody shut it down.

[evince]

If you read the act, Congress can declare that emergency over by passing a joint resolution. If Trump declares such an emergency, Congress can quickly end it. If one House of Congress passes a resolution to end it, the other house is required to send it to committee and within 15 days report it to the floor where it becomes the order of business which means leadership can't prevent a vote. It looks like the maximum time frame for Congress to act to overturn any emergency declaration is 36 days from the first introduction of such a resolution. Every member of Congress is going to be on record before it ever makes it to the courts. I don't see a majority being willing to agree it is a national emergency if they hope to be reelected.

bingo


Love your quote

[Poor Richard Saunders]

I tried to get a discussion on this topic started a week ago, and it seemed no one was interested. Now you folks have gone through all kinds of convoluted speak discussing something that was well discussed in the article I posted. Perhaps you will educate yourselves, and read the article I posted:



This edifice of extraordinary powers has historically rested on the assumption that the president will act in the country’s best interest when using them. With a handful of noteworthy exceptions, this assumption has held up. But what if a president, backed into a corner and facing electoral defeat or impeachment, were to declare an emergency for the sake of holding on to power? In that scenario, our laws and institutions might not save us from a presidential power grab. They might be what takes us down.

The article is hyperbolic fear mongering. Congress can shut down a national emergency declaration in a matter of a few hours by passing a joint resolution. A president facing electoral defeat or impeachment is not going to have a compliant Congress that supports his actions.

[evince]

he cant do it without congressional approval


he cant get their approval

[Sailor]

If you read the act, Congress can declare that emergency over by passing a joint resolution. If Trump declares such an emergency, Congress can quickly end it. If one House of Congress passes a resolution to end it, the other house is required to send it to committee and within 15 days report it to the floor where it becomes the order of business which means leadership can't prevent a vote. It looks like the maximum time frame for Congress to act to overturn any emergency declaration is 36 days from the first introduction of such a resolution. Every member of Congress is going to be on record before it ever makes it to the courts. I don't see a majority being willing to agree it is a national emergency if they hope to be reelected.

A concurrent resolution. Congress really could not do much and certainly not end it quickly.

Concurrent resolution - A legislative measure, designated "S. Con. Res." and numbered consecutively upon introduction, generally employed to address the sentiments of both chambers, to deal with issues or matters affecting both houses, such as a concurrent budget resolution, or to create a temporary joint committee. Concurrent resolutions are not submitted to the president and thus do not have the force of law.

[evince]

he cant get away with it idiots

he can NOT get the congressional cooperation he would need to possess

[Jade Dragon]

Trump seems eager to bury the Republicans.

[Jarod]

No. It doesn't. Seriously, read the rulings. You are supposed to be an attorney, act like it instead of pretending you are too stupid to actually understand what I have stated. Reality doesn't match up to your insistence, and instead of recognizing that you are wrong you just keep declaring the same thing over and over. It's disingenuous and I don't believe that you are that stupid. While some may, I am not one of them.

So you are clearly not a strict constructionist?

[Jarod]

No. I am simply pointing out that his statement is incorrect and why. The debate about the wall... not part of that. I do not believe that Trump will try to use emergency powers to build the wall and if he does I believe he will lose. I have no interest in debating hypothetical nonsense, I do have interest regarding facts though.

So you don’t believe he has that power? You are agreeing with me now?

[Damocles]

So you are clearly not a strict constructionist?

LOL. As if you can make that claim! I haven't actually laughed out loud at a post for a long time.

As I stated, read the frickin' rulings and you will see why the SCOTUS recognizes this power. At this point you are the black knight with no legs and arms trying to tell me we'll call it a draw...

[Jarod]

The wall? Yes. As I said. I don't think he will even try this because he knows it will end in failure making the "Image President" look even smaller than he already looks. It doesn't change that Emergency Powers do exist, just not for this. Jarod stated that they do not exist at all, which isn't backed up by reality, rulings, laws passed.... The President has Emergency powers, it is why Congress passed the National Emergency Powers Act in 1976 to give them some control and an expiration...

Despite the fact that presidents have claimed emergency powers in the past such action was not constitutional or lawful. Damocles is claiming presidential power is broader than what is granted the president by the constitution. A dangerous and bad path to go down. That creates a king not a limited constitutional officer.

[Damocles]

So you don’t believe he has that power? You are agreeing with me now?

No. You made a false blanket statement and I have shown it to be false. You are now the Black Knight saying, "It's just a flesh wound!"

[Jarod]

Emergency Power - Definition, Examples, Cases, Processes
https://legaldictionary.net/emergency-power

The President of the United States possesses certain powers to act in emergency situations. Though such “emergency power” is not specifically expressed in the Constitution , the Executive Branch is designed to be able to act quickly in times of war or national emergency.

BAM!

[Damocles]

Despite the fact that presidents have claimed emergency powers in the past such action was not constitutional or lawful. Damocles is claiming presidential power is broader than what is granted the president by the constitution. A dangerous and bad path to go down. That creates a king not a limited constitutional officer.

And here King Arthur is walking away from the Black Knight who has no legs and arms and he's shouting, "You yellow bastards! Come back here, I'll bite your legs off!"