Please disable your adblock and script blockers to view this page

Analysis | Rand Paul?s big rebuke of Trump?s ?national emergency,? and why it could actually matter


Congress
Trump
GOP
Senate
the Supreme Court
the Supreme Court.”Ohio State University
Loyola Law School
the Supreme Court’s
Princeton University


Rand Paul
Trump
Susan Collins
Jeff Flake
Jamal Khashoggi
Peter M. Shane
Jessica Levinson
Brett M. Kavanaugh
Keith E. Whittington


R
Republicans
Muslim

No matching tags

No matching tags


Maine
Syria
Afghanistan
Congress’

No matching tags

Positivity     39.00%   
   Negativity   61.00%
The New York Times
SOURCE: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/04/rand-pauls-big-rebuke-trumps-national-emergency-why-it-could-actually-matter/
Write a review: The Washington Post
Summary

He is actually predicting that the Supreme Court will strike down the national emergency declaration if and when it comes to that point, and he says Congress’s votes will matter.“We spent the last two months debating how much money should be spent on a wall, and Congress came to a clear conclusion: $1.3 billion,” Paul said. If presidents can find ways to work around Congress’ rejection of their requested spending priorities, Congress’ big gun has been silenced....A joint resolution underscoring that Congress has deliberately rejected the inclusion of border wall fencing in response to a presidential request could well move a court to say that this statute will not help finance it.Jessica Levinson of Loyola Law School says this is likely to come down to whether the courts (a) decide to narrowly interpret the statute or (b) focus more on whether there is actually an emergency and whether Trump has this authority.“It certainly adds weight to the idea that this is executive overreach and a blatant and problematic end-run around Congress,” Levinson said.

As said here by