San Antonio Express-News

Appeals panel backs border wall lawsuit

- By Ann E. Marimow

Afederal appeals court in Washington sided with House Democrats on Friday in their effort to block the Trump administra­tion’s diversion of billions of dollars to build the president’s signature southern border wall.

TheU.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimousl­y backed Congress’s power of the purse and said House lawmakers could proceed with their lawsuit alleging it was illegal for President Donald Trump to transfer the money for the wall.

The Constituti­on gives Congress spending authority, the court said, and it “requires two keys to unlock the Treasury, and the House holds one of those keys. The Executive Branch has, in a word, snatched the House’s key out of its hands,” according to the opinion from Judge David Sentelle, who was joined by

Judges Patricia Millett and Robert Wilkins.

House Democrats went to court claiming Trump violated the Constituti­on by ignoring congressio­nal spending limits and diverting more than $6 billion allocated for other purposes to fund the wall at the border with Mexico. The administra­tion invoked statutes it said allowed the president to repurpose appropriat­ions.

In a separate border wall case, the Supreme Court in July rejected an effort by environmen­talists to stop ongoing constructi­on of parts of the president’s border wall.

The D.C. Circuit panel on Friday said the Trump administra­tion had essentiall­y cut the House out of the appropriat­ions process, “rendering for naught” its vote to withhold border wall funding. The judges also rejected the Justice Department’s argument that the House cannot go to court to protect its interests without

consent of the Senate.

“The ironclad constituti­onal rule is that the Executive Branch cannot spend until both the House and the Senate say so,” according to Sentelle’s opinion. “Unlike the affirmativ­e power to pass legislatio­n,

the House can wield its appropriat­ions veto fully and effectivel­y all by itself, without any coordinati­on with or cooperatio­n from the Senate.”

Sentelle was nominated by President Ronald Reagan. Millett and Wilkins

were nominated by President Barack Obama.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hailed the court’s decision.

“On a bipartisan basis, Congress has repeatedly refused to fund the President’s immoral, ineffectiv­e and wasteful border wall,” she said in a statement. “The House of Representa­tives is committed to upholding our authority as the first branch of government to ensure that funds appropriat­ed by Congress for these vital initiative­s are used as directed.”

In August, the full D.C. Circuit held that a single house of Congress did have standing to pursue litigation against the administra­tion and sent the case back to the three-judge panel to consider other aspects of the administra­tion’s challenge to the House’s claims.

The three-judge panel was reviewing a 2019 decision from District Court Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump nominee, who held that the House lacked legal grounds or standing to bring the lawsuit.

The ruling Friday is unlikely to be the final word in the controvers­y. The Justice Department did not immediatel­y respond to a request for comment.

 ?? New York Times file photo ?? An appeals court ruled Friday that the House may sue President Donald Trump for his use of emergency powers to fund a border wall.
New York Times file photo An appeals court ruled Friday that the House may sue President Donald Trump for his use of emergency powers to fund a border wall.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States