Yes! Rand to vote against emergency declaration

[Superfluous Man]

Had he decleared a state of emergency and used funds already allocated to say the military or homeland security to build the fence, then I will agree with u [sic]. But that is not what he did, he is setting a dangerous precedent that other presidents are going to use to enslave us.

How is that not what he did?

[CaptUSA]

When the polling data shows immigrants time and time again will vote against our Constitutional rights it is moronic to ignore it. Stating facts is not trashing, however referring to groups of people as "them" like you did some say that is a slur.

Oh wait... Is that the same kind of polling data that gave us President Hillary??

Or is it the same kind of polling data that tells you what you already want to hear??

Or, perhaps, it's the same kind of polling data that is trying to direct public opinion and not measure it.

[donnay]

Changing that law may be a good idea.

But there's no need to say that he has to support one or the other and can't support following the Constitution right now before that law gets changed (if it ever can), while also supporting changing that law.

Also, I have seen no evidence that Trump's executive order is really pursuant to that law. Can you point to the part of it that you have in mind? Others here who have made claims similar to yours have not been able to do that.

Here is a good article that breaks it all down:

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...ional-approval

[Todd]

Oh wait... Is that the same kind of polling data that gave us President Hillary??

Or is it the same kind of polling data that tells you what you already want to hear??

Or, perhaps, it's the same kind of polling data that is trying to direct public opinion and not measure it.

Some polling data is more equal than others.

[Superfluous Man]

Here is a good article that breaks it all down:

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...ional-approval

I saw nowhere in that article that it referred to the law you mentioned, much less showing specifically where it authorized Trump to make this executive order. Maybe I missed it. Could you quote the part of the article that does? And if not (and even better yet), then, since you are acting like you know the law in question, can't you just cite the actual part of the law that you have in mind?

[donnay]

I saw nowhere in that article that it referred to the law you mentioned, much less showing specifically where it authorized Trump to make this executive order. Maybe I missed it. Could you quote the part of the article that does? And if not (and even better yet), then, since you are acting like you know the law in question, can't you just cite the actual part of the law that you have in mind?

There aren't any limits on the President if he declares a National Emergency of which he did. The National Emergency Act has given him the authority to declare it, which he declared on the southern border because of the caravans invading the country. Congress could challenge it and Congress can pass a concurrent resolution to terminate the state of emergency, but ultimately it would come back to the President to veto it.

[acptulsa]

There aren't any limits on the President if he declares a National Emergency of which he did.

Could you quote the part of the constitution that says, if the president declares an emergency this document is in abeyance, and its provisions are to be ignored for the duration?

[Superfluous Man]

There aren't any limits on the President if he declares a National Emergency of which he did.

Can you cite specifically where the law says this?

[CaptUSA]

There aren't any limits on the President if he declares a National Emergency of which he did. The National Emergency Act has given him the authority to declare it, which he declared on the southern border because of the caravans invading the country. Congress could challenge it and Congress can pass a concurrent resolution to terminate the state of emergency, but ultimately it would come back to the President to veto it.

You realize that logic gives the office of the President power to do just about anything, right? Forget checks and balances. Forget Constitutional limitations.

If you agree with what you just wrote, then you shouldn't complain when the other party's Executive does the same thing, or assumes increasing power.

[Todd]

You realize that logic gives the office of the President power to do just about anything, right? Forget checks and balances. Forget Constitutional limitations.

If you agree with what you just wrote, then you shouldn't complain when the other party's Executive does the same thing, or assumes increasing power.

It's an American past time to give the toys to "your guy", then get pissed off and outraged when the next guy plays with them. Don't you know how this country works.

[donnay]

Could you quote the part of the constitution that says, if the president declares an emergency this document is in abeyance, and its provisions are to be ignored for the duration?

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution names the President as the Commander-in-Chief of the naval and land forces of the United States.[[1]]U.S. CONST. art. II, § 2.[[1]]{{1}} It is generally agreed that the Commander-in-Chief role gives the President power to utilize the armed forces to repel attacks against the United States.

[juleswin]

You realize that logic gives the office of the President power to do just about anything, right? Forget checks and balances. Forget Constitutional limitations.

If you agree with what you just wrote, then you shouldn't complain when the other party's Executive does the same thing, or assumes increasing power.

I think they just have to declare a state of emergency first

[acptulsa]

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution names the President as the Commander-in-Chief of the naval and land forces of the United States.[[1]]U.S. CONST. art. II, § 2.[[1]]{{1}} It is generally agreed that the Commander-in-Chief role gives the President power to utilize the armed forces to repel attacks against the United States.

And this allows him to allocate what funds...?

[donnay]

You realize that logic gives the office of the President power to do just about anything, right? Forget checks and balances. Forget Constitutional limitations.

If you agree with what you just wrote, then you shouldn't complain when the other party's Executive does the same thing, or assumes increasing power.

It's not my logic, it is the fact that congress over the years have abdicated these powers to the President. If that disturbs Rand and others than propose the bills to repeal them.

These are the loopholes that Trump is using.

[juleswin]

How is that not what he did?

I thought he requested more funding than had already been given to him in the 2018 budget

[Superfluous Man]

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution names the President as the Commander-in-Chief of the naval and land forces of the United States.[[1]]U.S. CONST. art. II, § 2.[[1]]{{1}} It is generally agreed that the Commander-in-Chief role gives the President power to utilize the armed forces to repel attacks against the United States.

It seems like you're changing your whole argument now. So you're no longer talking about some law pertaining to national emergencies that was passed in 1976?

Note also that even the president's authority over the armed forces, even when using them to repel invasions, is limited by the funding Congress gives him for that.

[juleswin]

And this allows him to allocate what funds...?

The defense of the invasion I think

[donnay]

And this allows him to allocate what funds...?

Yes.

[CaptUSA]

These are the loopholes that Trump is using.

Oh, well, that makes it all right then... Carry on.

[donnay]

It seems like you're changing your whole argument now. So you're no longer talking about some law pertaining to national emergencies that was passed in 1976?

Note also that even the president's authority over the armed forces, even when using them to repel invasions, is limited by the funding Congress gives him for that.

H.R.3884 — 94th Congress (1975-1976)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/94th-c...ouse-bill/3884

[Superfluous Man]

I thought he requested more funding than had already been given to him in the 2018 budget

I'm confused by what you're talking about now. Are you talking about funding that he requested? Or the funding he is trying to allocate via his national emergency declaration?

My understanding is that reallocating money that Congress allocated to the military in the budget it passed and Trump signed recently to the building of a border wall is what Trump's national emergency declaration does.

[Superfluous Man]

H.R.3884 — 94th Congress (1975-1976)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/94th-c...ouse-bill/3884

You didn't even bother reading that. Did you?

If you did, then please quote the part that you think supports anything you've said in this thread so far.

[TER]

I guess the question then is one of what constitutes an emergency? This becomes subjective then. There are arguments that can be made that there is a national emergency at the borders and others can argue differently.

I respect Rand Paul’s position on this, as it is a principled one, but I agree with Trump that there is an emergency and with his plan to use the military to complete the project. Especially when it is political games being played to thwart Trump on a project (border walls) which up until recently was a bipartisan issue. The dems have already demonstrated that fairness and acting for the benefit of the American citizens are things they easily ignore for political expediency and to gain power.

I hope this doesn’t hurt Rand within the impassioned GOP base at this polarized time because he is by far the best politician in Washington.

[donnay]

Oh, well, that makes it all right then... Carry on.

I am not saying whether it is right or wrong, it is, what it is. If Rand and others have a problem with it they need to change it.

I am all for checks and balances. The democrats are not even willing to have a conversion. What is the man supposed to do?

[jon4liberty]

I am sorry but Rand is wrong here. If he wanted to do something about it, he and others in Congress need to change the National Emergencies Act of 1976. Congress abdicated this power to the President to declare a National Emergency.

Taking this court will only drag it out that much longer, but when it gets to court, a Judge is going to be reluctant to create a definition and interpret a law that Congress, itself, didn't bother to do in 1976.

Facts

If the liberty movement is compromised of guys with opinions similar to yours, then there is no liberty movement.

fAxTs

And the funny thing is i have helped more Libertarians win office then a keyboard warrior like you. YAL and winatthedoor i played a huge part. While you sit with a bag of cheetos in your mothers basement. Props to you!

[donnay]

You didn't even bother reading that. Did you?

If you did, then please quote the part that you think supports anything you've said in this thread so far.

I haven't got time to spoon feed you. Legal scholars have all made the point that the President is within the laws in place.

[Superfluous Man]

I guess the question then is one of what constitutes an emergency?

That may be one question. But there is no possible answer to that question which would make Trump's recent national emergency declaration attempting to spend money in defiance of Congress constitutional.

[Superfluous Man]

I haven't got time to spoon feed you. Legal scholars have all made the point that the President is within the laws in place.

You were pretending to know about the law in question yourself.

Is the truth actually that you were just relying on what you were led to believe some legal scholars had said, and actually had no clue what the law actually says?

[TER]

That may be one question. But there is no possible answer to that question which would make Trump's recent national emergency declaration attempting to spend money in defiance of Congress constitutional.

Maybe. Maybe not. I guess the courts will decide.

[Dr.3D]

My understanding is that reallocating money that Congress allocated to the military in the budget it passed and Trump signed recently to the building of a border wall is what Trump's national emergency declaration does.

Well, since Trump is the Commander in Chief of the military, doesn't he have have some say in what the military does with that money?