US President Donald Trump on Friday declared a national emergency along the border with Mexico and predicted that his administration would end up defending it all the way to the US Supreme Court.
That might have been the only thing he said that produced near-universal agreement.
The American Civil Liberties Union announced its intention to sue less than an hour after the White House released the text of Trump’s declaration that the “current situation at the southern border presents a border security and humanitarian crisis that threatens core national security interests and constitutes a national emergency.”
Photo: AFP
Nonprofit watchdog group Public Citizen filed suit later, urging the US District Court for the District of Columbia to “bar Trump and the US Department of Defense from using the declaration and funds appropriated for other purposes to build a border wall.”
US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi and several Democratic state attorneys general have already said that they might go to court.
The coming legal fight seems likely to hinge on two main issues: Can the US president declare a national emergency to build a border wall in the face of the US Congress’ refusal to give him all the money he wanted and, under the federal law Trump invoked in his declaration, can the department take money from some congressionally approved military construction projects to pay for wall construction?
The Pentagon has not said which projects might be affected.
However, after weeks of publicly ruminating whether to act, Trump’s signature on the declaration set in motion a quick march to the courthouse.
Trump relied on the National Emergencies Act of 1976, which Congress adopted as a way to put some limits on presidential use of national emergencies.
The act requires a US president to notify Congress publicly of the national emergency and to report every six months.
The law also says the president must renew the emergency every year, simply by notifying Congress.
The House and the US Senate can also revoke a declaration by majority vote, although it would take a two-thirds vote by each house to override an expected presidential veto.
Beyond that, the law does not say what constitutes a national emergency or impose any other limits on the president.
The broad grant of discretion to the president could make it hard to persuade courts to rule that Trump exceeded his authority in declaring a border emergency.
“He’s the one who gets to make the call. We can’t second-guess it,” said John Eastman, a professor of constitutional law at Chapman University’s School of Law.
Courts are often reluctant to look beyond the justifications the US president included in his proclamation, Ohio State University law professor Peter Shane said on a call organized by the liberal American Constitution Society.
However, other legal experts said that the facts are powerfully arrayed against the president.
They include government statistics showing a decades-long decline in illegal border crossings, as well as Trump’s rejection of a deal last year that would have provided more than the nearly US$1.4 billion he got for border security in a budget agreement he signed on Thursday.
Opponents of the declaration are also certain to use Trump’s own words at his Rose Garden news conference on Friday to argue that there is no emergency on the border.
“I could do the wall over a longer period of time,” Trump said. “I didn’t need to do this, but I’d rather do it much faster.”
US Representative Justin Amash, a Republican, said Congress made a conscious choice not to give Trump what he wanted.
“A prerequisite for declaring an emergency is that the situation requires immediate action and Congress does not have an opportunity to act,” Amash said on Twitter.
SILENCING CRITICS: In addition to blocking Taiwan, China aimed to prevent rights activists from speaking out against authoritarian states, a Cabinet department said The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) yesterday condemned transnational repression by Beijing after RightsCon, a major digital human rights conference scheduled to be held in Zambia this week, was abruptly canceled due to Chinese pressure over Taiwanese participation. This year’s RightsCon, the world’s largest conference discussing issues “at the intersection of human rights and technology,” was scheduled to take place from tomorrow to Friday in Lusaka, and expected to draw 2,600 in-person attendees from 150 countries, along with 1,100 online participants. However, organizers were forced to cancel the event due to behind-the-scenes pressure from China, the ministry said, expressing its “strongest condemnation”
Taiwan’s economy grew far faster than expected in the first quarter, as booming demand for artificial intelligence (AI) applications drove a surge in exports, spilling over into investment and consumption, the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) said yesterday. GDP growth was 13.69 percent year-on-year during the January-to-March period, beating the DGBAS’ February forecast by 2.23 percentage points and marking the most robust growth in nearly four decades, DGBAS senior official Chiang Hsin-yi (江心怡) told a news conference in Taipei. The result was powered by exports, which remain the backbone of Taiwan’s economy, Chiang said. Outbound shipments jumped 51.12 percent year-on-year to
DELAYED BUT DETERMINED: The president’s visit highlights Taiwan’s right to international engagement amid regional pressure from China President Willaim Lai (賴清德) yesterday arrived in Eswatini, more than a week after his planned visit to Taiwan’s sole African ally was suspended because of revoked overflight permits. “The visit, originally scheduled for April 22, was postponed due to unforeseen external factors,” Lai wrote on social media. “After several days of careful arrangements by our diplomatic and national security teams, we successfully arrived today.” Lai said he looked forward to further deepening Taiwan-Eswatini relations through closer cooperation in the economy, agriculture, culture and education, as well as advancing the nation’s international partnerships. The president was initially scheduled to arrive in time to celebrate
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) yesterday said the US faced a choice between an “impossible” military operation or a “bad deal” with Tehran, after US President Donald Trump disparaged Iran’s latest peace proposal. Negotiations between the two countries have been deadlocked since a ceasefire came into effect on April 8, with only one round of direct peace talks held so far. Iran’s Tasnim and Fars news agencies reported that Tehran had submitted a 14-point proposal to mediator Pakistan, but Trump was quick to cast doubt on it. “I will soon be reviewing the plan that Iran has just sent to us, but
RSS