Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

White House indicates Trump to veto disapproval of emergency
Associated Press ^ | February 17, 2019 | Zeke Miller

Posted on 02/17/2019 8:16:38 AM PST by Olog-hai

A top adviser to President Donald Trump indicated Sunday that Trump is prepared to issue the first veto of his term if Congress votes to disapprove of his declaration of a national emergency along the U.S.-Mexico border.

White House senior adviser Stephen Miller told “Fox News Sunday” that “the president is going to protect his national emergency declaration.”

Asked if that meant Trump was ready to veto, Miller added, “He’s going to protect his national emergency declaration, guaranteed.”

Trump declared the emergency Friday in an effort to go around Congress to fund his border wall. It would allow him to move federal dollars earmarked for military construction to the border — but is already facing legal and political challenges. …

(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; Mexico; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aliens; apfakenews; borderwall; disapproval; fakenews; illegals; nationalemergency; uniparty; veto
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last
To: EagleUSA

“Congress — America’s number one domestic enemy”.

The Media is # 1. I do see your point.

Most of Congress has been compromised. They are allowed to object and make noise but they don’t dare cross the line.


41 posted on 02/17/2019 9:14:27 AM PST by laplata (The Left/Progressives have diseased minds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lakewood
The House and Senate can pass a joint resolution withdrawing the Emergency Declaration.

Thanks. That makes more sense than the article stating that Congress is voting on "disapproval" of the emergency. The article called it a "resolution," not a bill.

"Disapproval" sounded like a sense of the Congress vote, and not a legislative vote.

-PJ

42 posted on 02/17/2019 9:15:26 AM PST by Political Junkie Too (The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: laplata

There is no such compromise. The RINOs are left-wing ideologues as much as the Dems are.


43 posted on 02/17/2019 9:17:51 AM PST by Olog-hai ("No Republican, no matter how liberal, is going to woo a Democratic vote." -- Ronald Reagan, 1960)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Thank You Rush

If I understand it correctly:

When (not “if) the Democrat-controlled House votes to decertify the President’s Emergency Declaration, the Senate will be asked to pass a similar bill.

If (not when) the Senate does not vote to decertify the President’s Emergency Declaration, then the President’s Declaration stands.

If the Senate DOES vote to decertify the President’s Emergency Declaration (Fat Chance), then the President can VETO that bill.

THEN, the Congress can attempt to “override” the President’s veto. (No Chance)

THEN, having failed with the “override”, the Dems can try “impeachment”. IOW, a Dem “suicide”?


44 posted on 02/17/2019 9:23:27 AM PST by pfony1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

The process for congress to overturn an emergency declaration is to pass a joint resolution. I am not familiar with presidential options when and if they do.


45 posted on 02/17/2019 9:24:59 AM PST by morphing libertarian (Use Comey's Report; Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

rats and rhinos are Americas enemies


46 posted on 02/17/2019 9:26:47 AM PST by ronnie raygun (nic dip.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian
Thanks.

-PJ

47 posted on 02/17/2019 9:32:13 AM PST by Political Junkie Too (The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy
If it is passed in the House the Senate would be “Obligated” to vote on it??? What Planet are you living on?

From the Compost, for what it's worth:

The NEA stipulates that if one chamber (Pelosi’s House) passes such a resolution, which it easily could do, the other (McConnell’s Senate) must act on it within a very short time period — forcing GOP senators to choose whether to support it.

48 posted on 02/17/2019 9:39:49 AM PST by JPG (MAGA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Notice the slant of their description - “his” border wall.


49 posted on 02/17/2019 9:47:50 AM PST by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

It won’t even make it to the floor of the senate. Turtle already said he supports the declaration.


50 posted on 02/17/2019 9:54:27 AM PST by VTenigma (The Democrat party is the party of the mathematically challenged)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: gibsonguy

No one was going to shut down the gubment again. You underestimate the loyalty to having gubment open that exists.


51 posted on 02/17/2019 10:01:26 AM PST by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually" (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

from lexisnexis

A joint resolution, H.J. Res. or S.J. Res., is a legislative proposal that requires the approval of both Chambers and the signature of the President, just as a bill does, in order to have the force of law.

Joint resolutions from each House are assigned a number in the order in which they are introduced. Joint resolutions may be introduced in either Chamber and generally are used for limited matters such as continuing or emergency appropriations or the designation of a commemorative holiday.

There is little practical difference between bills and joint resolutions, although only a joint resolution may be used to propose amendments to the Constitution. In the case of a Constitutional amendment, the signature of the President is not required, but three-quarters of the states must ratify the proposed amendment before it can become part of the Constitution.

Prior to the 77th Congress (1941), laws enacted by joint resolutions were numbered separately from bills in the Statutes at Large, but since that time there has been no distinction made between laws that were introduced as bills and laws that were introduced as joint resolutions.


52 posted on 02/17/2019 10:03:50 AM PST by morphing libertarian (Use Comey's Report; Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

This is why Trump should declare that the judiciary has no say in the response to national emergency. The code below gives congress the responsibility for checks and balances on emergency declarations. They can overrule with joint resolution.

You can’t ensure national security when your response is subject to judicial fiat of 1 or 3 judges.

Cal announced they will file a suit against the declaration. The governor says it interferes with their drug interdiction program (LOL),

no standing for a court or state to over turn an emergency decree. Only congress. But Trump’s stamens this morning indicates he will go through the court process possibly delaying construction till he loses the election.

The court should spank Pelosi and send her back to the house without supper. Below is her recourse.

If he cannot build more than 55 miles, he will not be re-elected.

The president should put the court on notice that they have no standing in national emergencies. The check and balance on the president’s emergency powers is the congress. You can’t respond to emergencies when any judge can overrule your actions.

The congress can terminate a president’s emergency declaration. THAT is the check and balance on presidential power. Trump should tell the court, you have no jurisdictions for emergencies. The country cannot respond to emergencies on the basis of judicial fiat.

HERE IS SOME INFO.

What the Law Does

The NEA authorizes the president to declare a national emergency, which declaration activates emergency powers contained in other federal statutes.3 During the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, the president’s declaration of a national emergency under the NEA, coupled with the HHS secretary’s prior determination of a public health emergency under Section 319 of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), permitted the activation of Social Security Act (SSA) Section 1135 waiver authorities. (See Figure A for the text of the 2009 H1N1 NEA declaration.)

How the Law Works
The NEA does not provide any specific emergency authority on its own, but relies on emergency authorities provided in other statutes. A national emergency declaration allows for the activation of these other statutory authorities. Emergency statutory provisions are not activated automatically, however; they must be specifically identified in the president’s declaration before these authorities may be given effect.

Declaration
NEA Section 201 authorizes the president to declare a national emergency. The proclamation of a national emergency must be immediately transmitted to Congress and published in the Federal Register.1,2 Under NEA Section 301, statutory emergency authorities enabled by the national emergency declaration cannot be exercised until the president specifies the provisions of law under which the president or other officials will act. Such specification may be made either in the declaration or in subsequent Executive Orders published in the Federal Register and transmitted to Congress.

Termination
A national emergency can be terminated if the president issues a proclamation or if Congress enacts a joint resolution terminating the emergency. A national emergency will terminate automatically upon the anniversary of the proclamation unless the president renews the proclamation by transmitting notice to Congress within a 90-day period prior to the anniversary date and publishing it in the Federal Register.

Immunity and Liability Issues
The national emergency provisions of the NEA do not address liability issues or provide any immunity. The act could be used to activate emergency authorities in other federal statutes that provide immunity during emergency events.

How the Law Affects States
National emergency declarations under the NEA can impact states through the federal statutory emergency authorities activated once the NEA declaration is made. The most recent example of this effect was the activation of SSA Section 1135 waiver authority during the H1N1 influenza pandemic.

FIGURE A
DECLARATION OF A NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO THE 2009 H1N1 INFLUENZA PANDEMIC
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION
October 24, 2009

“NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including sections 201 and 301 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) and consistent with section 1135 of the Social Security Act (SSA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 1320b-5), do hereby find and proclaim that, given that the rapid increase in illness across the Nation may overburden health care resources and that the temporary waiver of certain standard Federal requirements may be warranted in order to enable U.S. health care facilities to implement emergency operations plans, the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic in the United States constitutes a national emergency. Accordingly, I hereby declare that the Secretary may exercise the authority under section 1135 of the SSA to temporarily waive or modify certain requirements of the Medicare, Medicaid, and State Children’s Health Insurance programs and of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act Privacy Rule throughout the duration of the public health emergency declared in response to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. In exercising this authority, the Secretary shall provide certification and advance written notice to the Congress as required by section 1135(d) of the SSA (42 U.S.C. 1320b-5(d)).”4


53 posted on 02/17/2019 10:05:25 AM PST by morphing libertarian (Use Comey's Report; Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: central_va

I think that is going to have to happen. The roadblocks in front of a third party would be formidable from the Deep State’s bureaucratic stranglehold. But this recent approval of the Poison Pill bill by Republicans is really the last great revelation that they serve no purpose at all. They’re not good for anything. They don’t work, as in when your kids toys break. They don’t work any more and they never will.


54 posted on 02/17/2019 10:06:28 AM PST by squarebarb ( Fairy tales are basically true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian

I see no role for the courts or states in emergency declarations. Just congress as a check and balance. I would like to see Trump make a statement to the effect.


55 posted on 02/17/2019 10:06:58 AM PST by morphing libertarian (Use Comey's Report; Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: squarebarb

Building a conservative party might make the gop the third party


56 posted on 02/17/2019 10:08:17 AM PST by morphing libertarian (Use Comey's Report; Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Liz

That post was so good you did it twice.

8^)

5.56mm


57 posted on 02/17/2019 10:08:28 AM PST by M Kehoe (DRAIN THE SWAMP! BUILD THE WALL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian

From your lips to God’s ear.


58 posted on 02/17/2019 10:10:03 AM PST by squarebarb ( Fairy tales are basically true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Trump has already deployed the Military to protect the border.
Trump recently announced the Military will be deployed once again.

The Army Corp of Engineers support the efforts of the Military.

If the Army needs a Wall, the Wall will be built


59 posted on 02/17/2019 10:10:44 AM PST by Steven Tyler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: morphing libertarian
Good informative posts. Thanks.

-PJ

60 posted on 02/17/2019 10:23:57 AM PST by Political Junkie Too (The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-68 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson