Trump Has Unlimited Power in all 50 States Now

[OnePercenter]

Has anyone noticed that every time there is a disaster or crisis, the government is already prepared to deal with the situation with new laws to take away our Constitutional rights?

Nobody has taken away my constitutional rights.

~S~

Foilhead.

 

[OnePercenter]

Has anyone noticed that every time there is a disaster or crisis, the government is already prepared to deal with the situation with new laws to take away our Constitutional rights?

Nobody has taken away my constitutional rights.

The constitution is just an outdated piece of paper.....highly over-rated.....we need a new one that eliminates a lot of the confusion aka not knowing what the ancestors really meant as in they spoke a language that is not understood well today....hence the reason why the
Supreme court is constantly called upon to clarify what it means.....which results in the
Supreme Court rendering opinions based on their political bias....no not a good situation we are in.

A good example is how the democrats were able to skirt the constitutional requirement for a President to be a natural born citizen.

Are you still pushing that stupidity?

 

[OnePercenter]

The power of a war time President is so huge that I think it is one of the reasons we have not formally declared war on anyone since WW2.

Emergency powers are based on war time martial law powers and authorizes the President to do virtually anything he wants.

Trump has this emergency power in all 50 states now, and I have to admit that I do not like it.

Coronavirus: Trump has declared major disaster in all 50 states at once, first time in history

President Trump issued a major disaster declaration for Wyoming on Saturday, meaning that there is now such a declaration within all 50 states due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

www.foxnews.com

President Trump issued a major disaster declaration for Wyoming on Saturday, meaning that there is now such a declaration within all 50 states due to the COVID-19 pandemic.​

It is the first time a president has ever declared a major disaster in all 50 states at once, according to Deputy Press Secretary Judd Deere.​

The move comes as confirmed cases of the coronavirus reached at least 519,453 as of Saturday afternoon. At least 20,071 people have died in the U.S. due to the disease, a death toll surpassing the one in hard-hit Italy -- and a figure that has doubled, from 10,000 to more than 20,000, in just five days. Worldwide, confirmed cases have surpassed 1.75 million, and more than 100,000 people have died.​

The Alarming Scope of the President's Emergency Powers

From seizing control of the internet to declaring martial law, President Trump may legally do all kinds of extraordinary things.

www.theatlantic.com

Unknown to most Americans, a parallel legal regime allows the president to sidestep many of the constraints that normally apply. The moment the president declares a “national emergency”—a decision that is entirely within his discretion—more than 100 special provisions become available to him. While many of these tee up reasonable responses to genuine emergencies, some appear dangerously suited to a leader bent on amassing or retaining power. For instance, the president can, with the flick of his pen, activate laws allowing him to shut down many kinds of electronic communications inside the United States or freeze Americans’ bank accounts. Other powers are available even without a declaration of emergency, including laws that allow the president to deploy troops inside the country to subdue domestic unrest.​

​

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....​

​

Unlike the modern constitutions of many other countries, which specify when and how a state of emergency may be declared and which rights may be suspended, the U.S. Constitution itself includes no comprehensive separate regime for emergencies. Those few powers it does contain for dealing with certain urgent threats, it assigns to Congress, not the president. For instance, it lets Congress suspend the writ of habeas corpus—that is, allow government officials to imprison people without judicial review—“when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it” and “provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”​

​

Nonetheless, some legal scholars believe that the Constitution gives the president inherent emergency powers by making him commander in chief of the armed forces, or by vesting in him a broad, undefined “executive Power.” At key points in American history, presidents have cited inherent constitutional powers when taking drastic actions that were not authorized—or, in some cases, were explicitly prohibited—by Congress. Notorious examples include Franklin D. Roosevelt’s internment of U.S. citizens and residents of Japanese descent during World War II and George W. Bush’s programs of warrantless wiretapping and torture after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Abraham Lincoln conceded that his unilateral suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War was constitutionally questionable, but defended it as necessary to preserve the Union....​

​

Congress passed the National Emergencies Act in 1976. Under this law, the president still has complete discretion to issue an emergency declaration—but he must specify in the declaration which powers he intends to use, issue public updates if he decides to invoke additional powers, and report to Congress on the government’s emergency-related expenditures every six months. The state of emergency expires after a year unless the president renews it, and the Senate and the House must meet every six months while the emergency is in effect “to consider a vote” on termination.​

​

By any objective measure, the law has failed. Thirty states of emergency are in effect today—several times more than when the act was passed. Most have been renewed for years on end. And during the 40 years the law has been in place, Congress has not met even once, let alone every six months, to vote on whether to end them.​

​

As a result, the president has access to emergency powers contained in 123 statutory provisions, as recently calculated by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, where I work. These laws address a broad range of matters, from military composition to agricultural exports to public contracts. For the most part, the president is free to use any of them; the National Emergencies Act doesn’t require that the powers invoked relate to the nature of the emergency. Even if the crisis at hand is, say, a nationwide crop blight, the president may activate the law that allows the secretary of transportation to requisition any privately owned vessel at sea. Many other laws permit the executive branch to take extraordinary action under specified conditions, such as war and domestic upheaval, regardless of whether a national emergency has been declared.​

​

I don't love it either tbh....although in my state, he needs to take over the reins from my out of control gov. You know "That woman from MI"

Which State do you live?

Think hard. I promise it will not hurt!

Canada?

 

[OnePercenter]

Has anyone noticed that every time there is a disaster or crisis, the government is already prepared to deal with the situation with new laws to take away our Constitutional rights?

Such as... ? (I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just asking for evidence)

hehheh These morons that go on and on about their personal liberties are so clueless as to be irrelevant. Have no concept of National Security. If they had their way some mullah would be in the
White House.

In the mean time, the Coronavirus virus has jumped in front of the Mullah, with no leader in the WH.

No time for TDS we are in the midst of a National Emergency....with all the powers that a President has in such times to preserve the Nation.

Try again. Trump doesn't give two shits about the nation. He's too busy lying about the Coronavirus and worrying about some of his top end investments like Hydroxychloroquine, that is an unproven treatment for the virus.

If asswipePINO cared about the country, he would have acted on January 23, 2020. He was busy playing golf and attending mentally retarded rallies.

 

[candycorn]

Remember back when he said he could pardon himself and you guys cheered? There is scant difference.

 

[LuckyDuck]

The power of a war time President is so huge that I think it is one of the reasons we have not formally declared war on anyone since WW2.

Emergency powers are based on war time martial law powers and authorizes the President to do virtually anything he wants.

Trump has this emergency power in all 50 states now, and I have to admit that I do not like it.

Coronavirus: Trump has declared major disaster in all 50 states at once, first time in history

President Trump issued a major disaster declaration for Wyoming on Saturday, meaning that there is now such a declaration within all 50 states due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

www.foxnews.com

President Trump issued a major disaster declaration for Wyoming on Saturday, meaning that there is now such a declaration within all 50 states due to the COVID-19 pandemic.​

It is the first time a president has ever declared a major disaster in all 50 states at once, according to Deputy Press Secretary Judd Deere.​

The move comes as confirmed cases of the coronavirus reached at least 519,453 as of Saturday afternoon. At least 20,071 people have died in the U.S. due to the disease, a death toll surpassing the one in hard-hit Italy -- and a figure that has doubled, from 10,000 to more than 20,000, in just five days. Worldwide, confirmed cases have surpassed 1.75 million, and more than 100,000 people have died.​

The Alarming Scope of the President's Emergency Powers

From seizing control of the internet to declaring martial law, President Trump may legally do all kinds of extraordinary things.

www.theatlantic.com

Unknown to most Americans, a parallel legal regime allows the president to sidestep many of the constraints that normally apply. The moment the president declares a “national emergency”—a decision that is entirely within his discretion—more than 100 special provisions become available to him. While many of these tee up reasonable responses to genuine emergencies, some appear dangerously suited to a leader bent on amassing or retaining power. For instance, the president can, with the flick of his pen, activate laws allowing him to shut down many kinds of electronic communications inside the United States or freeze Americans’ bank accounts. Other powers are available even without a declaration of emergency, including laws that allow the president to deploy troops inside the country to subdue domestic unrest.​

​

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....​

​

Unlike the modern constitutions of many other countries, which specify when and how a state of emergency may be declared and which rights may be suspended, the U.S. Constitution itself includes no comprehensive separate regime for emergencies. Those few powers it does contain for dealing with certain urgent threats, it assigns to Congress, not the president. For instance, it lets Congress suspend the writ of habeas corpus—that is, allow government officials to imprison people without judicial review—“when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it” and “provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”​

​

Nonetheless, some legal scholars believe that the Constitution gives the president inherent emergency powers by making him commander in chief of the armed forces, or by vesting in him a broad, undefined “executive Power.” At key points in American history, presidents have cited inherent constitutional powers when taking drastic actions that were not authorized—or, in some cases, were explicitly prohibited—by Congress. Notorious examples include Franklin D. Roosevelt’s internment of U.S. citizens and residents of Japanese descent during World War II and George W. Bush’s programs of warrantless wiretapping and torture after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Abraham Lincoln conceded that his unilateral suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War was constitutionally questionable, but defended it as necessary to preserve the Union....​

​

Congress passed the National Emergencies Act in 1976. Under this law, the president still has complete discretion to issue an emergency declaration—but he must specify in the declaration which powers he intends to use, issue public updates if he decides to invoke additional powers, and report to Congress on the government’s emergency-related expenditures every six months. The state of emergency expires after a year unless the president renews it, and the Senate and the House must meet every six months while the emergency is in effect “to consider a vote” on termination.​

​

By any objective measure, the law has failed. Thirty states of emergency are in effect today—several times more than when the act was passed. Most have been renewed for years on end. And during the 40 years the law has been in place, Congress has not met even once, let alone every six months, to vote on whether to end them.​

​

As a result, the president has access to emergency powers contained in 123 statutory provisions, as recently calculated by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, where I work. These laws address a broad range of matters, from military composition to agricultural exports to public contracts. For the most part, the president is free to use any of them; the National Emergencies Act doesn’t require that the powers invoked relate to the nature of the emergency. Even if the crisis at hand is, say, a nationwide crop blight, the president may activate the law that allows the secretary of transportation to requisition any privately owned vessel at sea. Many other laws permit the executive branch to take extraordinary action under specified conditions, such as war and domestic upheaval, regardless of whether a national emergency has been declared.​

Chill. Unlike the left, which would indeed become draconian and implement Marxist/Leninist policies, thus taking away the publics freedoms, permanently, Trump has repeatedly made it clear that he want this nation opened up as soon as possible as "free-market capitalism," needs to get back on its feet and is only going along with NIH and CDC recommendations.

​

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

Has anyone noticed that every time there is a disaster or crisis, the government is already prepared to deal with the situation with new laws to take away our Constitutional rights?

Nobody has taken away my constitutional rights.

This is not a time to be concerned about individual liberties.....the chinese virus must be destroyed as it is a threat to the USA....then we can talk about individual liberties which really are not that important in
America as we have a government that believes in freedom.

You can always count on President Trump to do the right thing. Long live the King!!!

Ok, comrade

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

The constitution is just an outdated piece of paper.....highly over-rated.....we need a new one that eliminates a lot of the confusion aka not knowing what the ancestors really meant as in they spoke a language that is not understood well today....hence the reason why the
Supreme court is constantly called upon to clarify what it means.....

They spoke English. ENGLISH.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Canada?

That is your tell, not a thought.