Has the Supreme Court Already Decided the Wall Case?
Interesting. I think Trump AND the country wins the wall case either way but this is interesting.
If Trump wins then the country and Republicans lose in the long run. Trump will not win if the Constitution is followed. The Constitution is very clear on Congress' power of the purse. Maybe we should look at DACA as well. The Supreme Court passed on a case this year which means the earliest it can be taken up is in October. John Roberts decided this was a political case and he decided to delay taking one as long as possible in hopes of the people deciding this. If the so-called conservatives show that they are phony conservatives by siding with Trump, Roberts could vote not to take the case and run the clock out.
David French of NR has provided a analysis as well and his opinion is Trump will not win.
With the president’s authority constitutionally constrained in a time of actual war, President Trump won’t have greater power when the “foe” isn’t the Chinese Army but instead a caravan of poor, unarmed Hondurans.
The reason the public largely doesn’t track these emergency declarations is that they don’t make the president an autocrat. Instead, they unlock powers that are themselves limited by statute. And, in this case, the two relevant statutes for the border wall are simply not broad enough to encompass Trump’s dream of “military” eminent domain.
The first statute is
10 U.S.C. Section 2808. Its language is relatively restrictive:
In the event of a declaration of war or the declaration by the President of a national emergency in accordance with the National Emergencies Act (
50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)
that requires use of the armed forces, the Secretary of Defense, without regard to any other provision of law, may undertake military construction projects, and may authorize the Secretaries of the military departments to undertake military construction projects, not otherwise authorized by law that are necessary to
support such use of the armed forces. Such projects may be undertaken only within the total amount of funds that have been appropriated for military construction, including funds appropriated for family housing, that have not been obligated. [Emphasis added.]
Note the key limitations. The president would have to show that the “emergency”
requires the use of the military — a difficult task in a time of peace when the relevant border is with a national ally. It’s a task rendered even more difficult by the fact that border security is a function of the civilian Department of Homeland Security, not the Department of Defense.
Even then, the language indicates the funds can be used only to support the “use” of the armed forces. This strongly implies that the funding would be reserved for projects that benefit the
military. That conclusion is buttressed by the next section, which relates to a different category of project — those projects that are actually essential to national defense.
33 U.S.C Section 2293 states:
In the event of a declaration of war or a declaration by the President of a national emergency in accordance with the National Emergencies Act [
50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.] that requires or
may require use of the Armed Forces, the Secretary, without regard to any other provision of law, may (1) terminate or defer the construction, operation, maintenance, or repair of any Department of the Army civil works project that he deems not essential to the national defense, and (2) apply the resources of the Department of the Army’s civil works program, including funds, personnel, and equipment, to construct or assist in the construction, operation, maintenance, and repair of
authorized civil works, military construction, and civil defense projects that are
essential to the national defense. [Emphasis added.]
Once again, I’ve highlighted the relevant provisions. Section 2293 grants the president greater discretion in one clause, then limits that discretion in another. While the emergency only “may require” use of the military, the project must be both “authorized” and “essential” to “national defense.” The language plainly contemplates shifting of funds from one or more projects to other projects
already authorized.
A new or expanded border barrier has not been authorized by any lawful process.
Donald Trump Can’t Use an Emergency Declaration To Build a Wall | National Review