No he can’t, not for gangs.
The one being perpetrated against us by the foreign terrorist organizations incursions into the US as identified by the only person constitutionally authorized to say so.
1 Like
unless you were talking about the quasi war which this law was enacted to strengthen the Pesident’s hand against our enemies
unless you’re going to argue the President’s powers to respond to an incursion or invasion is less than the congress’ power to declare war (which would be ludicrous), yes he can.
Wait! You’re talking about Trump and now?
I’m asking you. What “quasi” war?
The Quasi war, Psuedo war, French/American war, the undeclared war… has lots of names. Is your google broke? You can find history there!
It absolutely is Constitutionally.
No he can’t. You might make the case for invasion with all Venezuelans.
You can’t make it with a couple thousand gangbangers
I thought so. And in the “Quasi”, who was targeted by the AEA?
That would be false. The only person constitutionally authorized to respond to an invasion is the President. His power to do that is no less than the Congress’ ability to declare war. The President may respond to ANY invasion or incursion he identifies as a security threat to the US.
1 Like
irrelevant. The law gave the President the authority to deport foreign nationals who he deemed to be “enemy aliens” in an “undeclared war”. The very FIRST use of it was in an undeclared war, it would be stupid to now say the war has to be declared.
1 Like
There is no invasion.
What?
your opinion is irrelevant. It is the President that determines what constitutes an invasion or incursion.
1 Like
The very first line of it is what?
The government of Venezuela is not doing this.
Gangbangers are not a government, nation, nor country.
You are trying to turn a crime problem into a war to rationalize violating the Constitution.
That is a very, very dangerous thing to do.
You should know better.
Now it is a dictatorship.
Why do you think it suddenly was floated out there…conveniently and totally coincidentally…by the Trump Administration that TdA was being run by the Maduro government?
I expect that to be the basis of any appeal Trump might try to make.
I also expect them to provide precisely zero evidence that Maduro is directing the activities of TdA.
Not that this lack of evidence will matter to those Trump supporters who have already decided it’s true.
1 Like
They can’t, it doesn’t exist.
We had this discussion yesterday.
Do I believe Maduro is enjoying it? Absolutely. Doing it? No.
This is straight up economically motivated crime.
We’re back to the crack war days.
your opinion is just wrong.
The President is authorized constitutionally to respond to an invasion or incursion. His power to do so is no less than the Congress’ power to declare war. This is a well-established legal fact. To respond to an invasion or incursion all the President need do is identify it. There is no other requirement. It is the President and the President alone with this power.
The Congress gave the President the authority to identify foriegn terrorist organizations. The Congress has declared war via AUMF (which is a declaration of war) on foreign terrorist organizations (historically, not particular to this case) and it has been upheld by the courts. The President power to respond to incursions or invasions is no less than the Congress ability to declare war; ergo, the President can respond to an incursion by an FTO.
The President has identified an incursion/invasion of the United states by designated foreign terrorist organizations and can respond. Use of the AEA is authorized in this circumstance as a congressionally authorized enhancement of the war powers of the President.
That said, this would be a good place to mention the actual intent of the WPA, which is for cases where-in the President acted within his constitutional authority without congressional approval.
To date, it has only been used to justify Presidential action not within his constitutional authority being intentionally misread to allow unlawful actions.
when it comes to determining an invasion or incursion… always has been
If you know who the President has to get permission from to respond to an invasion… please enlighten us
better yet, tell us who the President must wait for to identify the invasion or incursion before he acts
The word invasion appears in the Constitution precisely three times.
Precisely zero of those times does it delegate to the Executive the sole power…or even delegate the power at all…to decide when an invasion has occurred.
As a matter of fact, the only time it is mention in conjunction with a delegated power is Article 1 Section 8…where the powers delegated to the LEGISLATURE are laid out.
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
In the AEA, the President can declare an invasion has taken place, but with the important distinction that it has to be at the direction of the foreign nation or government, as WuWei has pointed out. So again, he doesn’t have unlimited power to declare an invasion.
Also as he pointed out, trying to turn a law enforcement matter into a war matter is fraught with danger and almost certainly a violation of the Constitution.
The Trump Administration is likely aware of this…hence their attempt to connect TdA to Maduro.
2 Likes
