National Emergency? What National Emergency?   (Part Two)

By Hank Silverberg  

                                                                                                                                                 

It has happened. The President declared a “National Emergency”This past week, citing illegal immigration on our southern border as the reason.  But there is a serious constitutional question that still needs to be dealt with before any implementation takes place. 

The declaration came after the Congress approved a new spending bill to keep the government open that included only $1.3 billion to partially fund some kind of barrier or fencing on the border. That fell short of the $5.7 billion Mr. Trump wanted to build his wall.  He will use the “National Emergency” to transfer money from other parts of the budget to make up the difference, including about $3.6 billion from military construction projects. That is where the real battle could begin.   

It is, of course, NOT the first time a President has declared a “National Emergency.” But this time the focus is different. The list below, provided by the Brennan Center for Justice, shows all 59 National Emergencies declared since 1979. (The law was revised in 1976.) Almost all of them have something to do with foreign policy, an area specifically under the Constitutional purview of the President. Only one is domestic in nature, issued by President Obama in 2009, to deal with the swine flu epidemic. 

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/NEA%20Declarations.pdf

Even the President, in what can best be described as a rambling news conference, admitted that he expects a legal challenge to his declaration. The reason? There is a constitutional question on whether any President can circumvent the decision of Congress on how and where to allocate money. 

 The U. S.  Constitution  http://constitutionus.com/ is clear on who makes monetary decisions. 

                              Article I

Section 7

    1: All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills.

The National Emergencies Act also allows Congress to override a Presidential declaration the same way it overrides a Presidential veto. That would require a large number of Republicans to go against the President, the leader of their own party.

The bottom line: all this may end up in the U.S. Supreme Court, which is now dominated by Conservatives.

The New York Times described the declaration this way:

“...in a breathtaking display of executive disregard for the separation of powers, the White House is thumbing its nose at Congress, the Constitution and the will of the American people, the majority of who oppose a border wall.”

Polls seem to back up that last assertion. A recent CBS poll found eight in ten Republicans favor a border wall. But 59% of the overall public oppose building a border wall on the U.S.- Mexico border, including two thirds of the Independents and 84% of the Democrats.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/views-on-southern-border-wall-have-been-consistent-since-trump-became-president/

Having written all this, let's look at the reasons Mr.

(Part of the 654 miles of existing fencing)

Trump wants the wall.

He says it’s to stop a massive influx of illegal immigrants across the southern border, including more than four thousand who have committed murders.

Government statistics just don’t back that up. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection says 396,579 undocumented people were caught entering the country in 2018. Another 124,511 presented themselves at the border seeking asylum on humanitarian grounds, and were rejected. Compare that to the 1.6 million border crossers who were apprehended in 2000 and the 1.3 million caught in 2001. 

If you do the math, it means illegal immigration on the border has been cut in half over the last 20 years. So why an emergency now?

https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration/fy-2018

And what about the “four thousand” murderers the President says got in? The government does not actually keep statistics on this, so the claim is dubious. Several studies have indicated that immigrants as a whole, both legal and illegal, commit crimes at a lower rate than native born Americans.

https://www.cato.org/blog/immigration-crime-what-research-says

I wrote more about this in a previous posting of "Time to Think."
 (See also:)   https://hanksilverberg.blogspot.com/2019/01/national-emergency-whatemergency-by.html

Human trafficking is still a considerable issue along the border, and so are illegal narcotics. But there’s no evidence a wall would stop either crime. In fact, the recent trial of convicted South American drug kingpin El Chapo Guzman, revealed he used tunnels, speed boats and even a submarine to smuggle drugs across the border, as well as vehicles at border crossings that had guards and fences.

   

What is the solution to illegal immigration, human trafficking and drug smuggling? Numerous law enforcement agencies and politicians have suggested a combination of increased border patrols (more officers), new detection technology (including drones), and a faster way to screen those seeking entry legally or caught entering illegally. That would include hundreds of new immigration judges. Those suggestions sound practical to me, and I suspect millions of Americans would agree.  

 

      (Your suggestions and comments are welcome) 

 (My book "The Campaign" can be purchased at Amazon.com, BN.Com or hanksilverbergbooks.com or by emailing me at hanksilverberg@gmail.com for details on a reduced price signed copy)