The "national emergency" in the context of Constitutional Governance


But I am not a liberal (at least not in the progressive usage of that term). Yes, I oppose the wall on principle. However, I do support other vigorous measures to both secure the border and to timely and justly process illegal immigrants through the system and remove offenders from the country.

But the inverse of that argument is the very reason that Trump’s declaration is illegal. This is not an emergency. Rather, it is him trying to exercise his ideological preferences in defiance of Congress, under the masquerade of an emergency. This will not stand in the courts, neither the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit or the United States Supreme Court.

Don’t forget that even President Truman had his hand smacked by the courts when he tried to seize steel mills under the guise of an ACTUAL WAR IN PROGRESS.


The complaint quotes Jackson’s concurrence in Youngstown in the opening of the first claim for relief.

The President acts at the lowest ebb of his power if he acts contrary to the expressed or implied will of Congress


See my post on Declaring War. Congressional delegation of that has been going on since WWII. SCOTUS has consistently refused to intervene citing it as a “political question”. Why is this any different?


Congress has not delegated their power to declare war.

No war has been declared since WWII.


He’s acting in accordance with the will of congress as expressed in the NEA of 1976.


Exactly. How many wars have we been in since WWII? They have all been fought under some type of resolution which leaves it up to the president to decide on war or not.


I don’t think that Congress intended to cede appropriations power to the executive by passing the NEA.

Even if they did intend that (staggeringly unlikely, of course) its questionable whether they could.


The President is the Commander-in-chief. He has the Constitutionally-delegated power to command the military. If he sends them to Vietnam, its unclear whether Congress could do anything about it.

The War Powers Act is a political compromise.

On the other hand, there is no question that the Constitution explicitly give Congress the power of appropriations.


I think this should be the final wake up call for folks like Wallace. Hes catching real bad hell on the twittersphere from trumpists.


The NEA states that certain previously apportioned funds are placed at a president’s disposal to use if he declares an emergency. That is simply an extension of congress’ appropriation power.


He is not acting in accordance to the will of the people’s representatives. The people that passed that are long gone.


Neither is there any doubt that the Constitution gives congress the exclusive power to declare that a state of war exists. Congress has been ceding that power to the president for over 70 years.


It doesn’t say that. It says something along those lines, but its much more specific.

The problem here is not the NEA itself - it’s how Trump is trying to use the NEA.


Is a legal state of war required to deploy troops?

I don’t think so.


The people who wrote the constitution are long gone. Your parents may be long gone- does that mean that you are gone?


You are claiming that some congress back then had some will that excuses what der trumpengroper is doing to subvert congress’s constitutional power.


It should be. The framers did not intend that wars which grind on for years not be declared by congress.
BTW- Congress does not want to declare war, because it puts them on record of approving a war. With the Military Force authorizations they can blame the president.


Too muddled to even answer.


John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and James Monroe all deployed troops into combat without a Congressional declaration of war.

Its tough to take your crystal ball as to the framer’s intent over their actual actions.


It makes Trump look bad so i know why.