As posted on other thread:
Pelosi Triggered as Trump Issues First Veto Over National Emergency
http://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3735344/posts?page=18
I saw an interesting comment somewhere on Friday that I’ve not seen explored further elsewhere but would seem to make sense legally. If/as so then Nancy stepped out of line and this whole thing in sequence + context is amazing.
There are two aspects of an EO - in this case the national emergency. There’s the declaration designating who can + will do what. Then there’s the implementation actually then executed upon such designation. These are two separate events with accompanying distinctions in legal realm.
POTUS issued the declaration but it was NEVER acted upon until Friday afternoon when Barr officially executed the order on Friday 3/15 at 3:24 PM.
The nuance of the National Emergencies Act and whatever legislation has since followed is unknown (to me at least) and even if/as so, it’s going to be up to the SCOTUS to ultimately settle this - as a PROCESS issue.
1. POTUS issues national emergency.
2. House votes to deny.
3. Senate affirms (thanks RINO-12)
4. POTUS vetoes.
5. Barr signs & executes order implementing national emergency.
SHOULDN’T #5 be #2 ???!?!?!?!??!?!
Until #5 happened it would seem any action is moot except to the degrees that a Sense of Congress is issued.
Otherwise it’s another nail in the coffin for Pelosi to fight legally using the weight of the House.
DS: Objection
POTUS: Denied
DS: Exception!
SCOTUS: Noted
BUILD THE WALL! :)
WWG1WGA
Interesting question.
I hope some of our legal team will opine.
Note that the courts, Congress appropriates and legislated. Executives execute. That has been done. In this process, the courts can only rule on whether the process was carried out in Constitutional fashion.
For the courts to be involved at this point, there necessarily needs to be a question of Constitutionality (Marbury v madison).
Since all steps have been followed, the courts have no “standing”. Congress can take up the veto and still...the courts cannot be involved.
Once someone can prove “harm” and sue the C-in-C, the courts *should* remain mute [proper use] on all processes leading up to the filing of such suit.
Congress cannot file a tort against the executive branch for actions taken according to the Constitution. This is clearly spelled out in the Constitution. (Lots of inside baseball here but POTUS must spend appropriations on the thing legislated and Congress cannot tell POTUS how to spend the appropriations. POTUS can only not spend the money.
It now remains for the DS to manufacture a tort with real damages to the citizens of the US. I’m hard pressed to figure the how/what but, trust me...they will.
Until such time, the money being spent has already been legislated and POTUS will1 follow the reccomendations for spending (see above). The tort will need to come at so3m later point.
And since it is an emergency POTUS need not work his way through the lower courts. A challenge should expedite the trip to SCOTUS... my read FWIW.