Senator Rand Paul has announced that he will be voting to overturn President Trump's declaration of a national emergency at the border. That means it will be likely that the Senate and the House will vote against the declaration by narrow margins. Trump has already said he will veto that vote, and that veto will be sustained. As a result, the emergency declaration will stand.
Paul says his move is based upon the Constitution. He says that the Supreme Court will strike down the President's emergency declaration. That's idiotic. For what it is worth, Paul is an ophthalmologist by training. He may know eyes, but he seems not to know laws. The Congress passed a measure over 40 years ago which deals with emergency situations requiring expenditures of money. Congress recognized that the appropriations process might be too slow or even stalled and that there could be emergencies which could not wait. As a result, Congress gave the president the power to declare a national emergency and after that declaration, the ability to move around certain money which was already appropriated by Congress to meet that emergency. Congress retained the power to cancel the emergency. It is highly unlikely that SCOTUS would declare that structure unconstitutional. After all, the money is appropriated by Congress. Congress can protect funds from being moved by the president at the time of the appropriation. Congress has the power to overturn a presidential emergency decree. In a world that often requires quick action, it seems clearly within the power of Congress to set up this structure.
Maybe Rand Paul got an honorary degree from some law school in Kentucky and it went to his head.
Paul says his move is based upon the Constitution. He says that the Supreme Court will strike down the President's emergency declaration. That's idiotic. For what it is worth, Paul is an ophthalmologist by training. He may know eyes, but he seems not to know laws. The Congress passed a measure over 40 years ago which deals with emergency situations requiring expenditures of money. Congress recognized that the appropriations process might be too slow or even stalled and that there could be emergencies which could not wait. As a result, Congress gave the president the power to declare a national emergency and after that declaration, the ability to move around certain money which was already appropriated by Congress to meet that emergency. Congress retained the power to cancel the emergency. It is highly unlikely that SCOTUS would declare that structure unconstitutional. After all, the money is appropriated by Congress. Congress can protect funds from being moved by the president at the time of the appropriation. Congress has the power to overturn a presidential emergency decree. In a world that often requires quick action, it seems clearly within the power of Congress to set up this structure.
Maybe Rand Paul got an honorary degree from some law school in Kentucky and it went to his head.
No comments:
Post a Comment