8
8
0
Currently there are 31 Active States of Emergency.
The United States' States of Emergencies
Posted from psmag.com
Constitution
Office of the President (POTUS)
Immigration
Economy
Posted 6 y ago
Responses: 8
3
3
0
When the 58 National Emergencies are reviewed, it is apparent the requirements are wide in scope, most have nothing to do with an emergency threatening the nation. Thousands of individuals certainly do.
(3)
(0)
1
1
0
So the way this is going to pan out I am pretty sure is the Supreme Court will agree with the Congress that the President cannot redirect money without their approval from an unrelated program. I noticed Trump is going all out on this and attempting a redirect from moneys earned from trade vs using moneys already budgeted via Homeland Security (ha-ha). So in that respect Trump is attempting to go well beyond a simple stretch of interpretation here. I think that was deliberate on his part for the attempted power grab from Congress. I think the Supreme Court will affirm that the actual declaration of the Emergency is still within the rights of the President. I agree with FOX news on their analysis here that the President was more than successful in getting money for the border here as they budgeted far more money for the border than he asked for BUT they put all sorts of restrictions on building of the wall. So at this point I would say time to move on. He can bring up the border issue in his next term after showing he attempted multiple times to get it this term. This is not a total loss yet and I think he has done enough to move on to something else like Infrastructure. He basically got a win-win agreement even though he is still stuck on the one point of wall building.
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
His comments while announcing the declaration--I didn't have to do this, I could have done it over time----contradict the claim of an emergency. Regardless, Congress deliberately failed to define "national emergency."
This linked article gives a detailed explanation of Presidential powers in relation to Congressional authority with case law. Unfortunately, it was written in 1972, before the 1976 act addressing National Emergencies.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D3357%26context%3Dlcp&ved=2ahUKEwi_qrH1ub7gAhUSUt8KHb9nAqMQFjAAegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw1kWJnzT0mOxcL2beQ9AjQd
This linked article gives a detailed explanation of Presidential powers in relation to Congressional authority with case law. Unfortunately, it was written in 1972, before the 1976 act addressing National Emergencies.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D3357%26context%3Dlcp&ved=2ahUKEwi_qrH1ub7gAhUSUt8KHb9nAqMQFjAAegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw1kWJnzT0mOxcL2beQ9AjQd
(0)
(0)
SPC Erich Guenther
1SG (Join to see) - Yeah that was a stupid thing to say. I hope the Supreme Court spells this out in detail though as it is a gray area in some respects. The other item that needs to be more clearly spelled out is reprogramming of left over money at the end of the year that is appropriated but not used. I think that money should flow back to the Treasury for the next appropriation cycle unless Congress agrees on a diversion for another purpose. This whole argument over the wall I think has escalated way too much. He can run on it as an issue in 2020 and push it after the election if he persuades enough people. He only wants to push it through faster because he is impatient.
(0)
(0)
SPC Erich Guenther
LTC (Join to see) - I have seen those interpretations of the law as well. I don't agree with them. I think it is good the Supreme Court is going to rule on this finally because I think it needs to remain the power of Congress to approve any spending of surplus or not appropriated funds. Understood there is frustration over the Democrats in the House but guess who is to blame for that? POTUS chose to sit on his azz and only campaign for Senators and he let the House folks running for election wither in the wind. Well this is what happens when you follow a strategy like that.
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
LTC (Join to see)
I appreciated that post, and had never saw it. I see it clarified the use of military for the projects, but it doesn't permit such use for unfunded objects, nor was it approved to permit the bypassing of the Constitutional process for appropriations. Funds have to be approved by Congress, and this clarified it wouldn't be a posse comitatus violation for the functions addressed, but doesn't permit that use for a project denied by the appropriate branch of our government.
I appreciated that post, and had never saw it. I see it clarified the use of military for the projects, but it doesn't permit such use for unfunded objects, nor was it approved to permit the bypassing of the Constitutional process for appropriations. Funds have to be approved by Congress, and this clarified it wouldn't be a posse comitatus violation for the functions addressed, but doesn't permit that use for a project denied by the appropriate branch of our government.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Here's a list of the 31 national emergencies that have been in effect for years
According to the Federal Register, 58 national emergencies have been declared since the National Emergency Act of 1976 was signed into law by President Gerald Ford.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
#1 is interesting. How did one President declare a National Emergency in regards to Iran and another President provide them with hundreds of billions of dollars?
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
LTC (Join to see)
One President did it as a penalty for Iran taking members of our embassy hostage.
The payment was made in accordance with agreements the U.S. obligated itself to under the Algiers Accords, and failure to comply with the agreement would have resulted in a ruling for a greater amount had it gone through the Hague.
One President did it as a penalty for Iran taking members of our embassy hostage.
The payment was made in accordance with agreements the U.S. obligated itself to under the Algiers Accords, and failure to comply with the agreement would have resulted in a ruling for a greater amount had it gone through the Hague.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Thank you for the explanation. I did not realize that Article II Gabe the President this authority. Learn something new everyday. 1SG (Join to see)
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google