Temper tantrum
America has survived many national emergencies. Presidents have dealt with innumerable crises. Being forced to sign a compromise-laden spending bill doesn’t qualify.
The announcement Thursday that President Donald Trump will declare a national emergency is an act of petulance. Trump was thwarted by House Democrats so he’ll show them: He’ll invoke the emergency powers of the presidency to tap other government sources for funding.
He likely faces a court challenge. Legal scholars have said that declaring an emergency could give the White House authority to divert the U.S. military from other construction projects to work on Trump’s wall. But there is no statutory definition of “emergency,” and the laws that may empower Trump to sidestep Congress don’t give him carte blanche. There are technical requirements that must be met in order for the military to put aside other construction duties to build a wall.
His threat wildly oversteps the limits of presidential powers. Congress makes the laws and approves budgets. Presidents have veto power but they aren’t emperors.
Trump sought $5.7 billion in a spending bill for the wall and tangled with those unyielding House Democrats. The impasse led to the previous 35-day-long partial government shutdown. This week, all sides came together to hash out the spending bill that gives Trump just $1 billion or so for barriers. Without this deal, the government would go back into shutdown mode Friday at midnight. So Trump relented. Now he wants to bully his way to building a wall by justifying his action on national security and humanitarian grounds.
Border security is vital to the country, but Trump’s obsession with building a physical wall isn’t justified by facts on the ground. This is his political preoccupation, not an existential crisis for the United States. If he declares a national emergency that survives court scrutiny, Trump claims a victory at real cost to the balance of powers between the presidency and Congress. He undermines the Constitution.
In recent decades presidents have sought to expand their authority through the use of executive action. Trump’s threat to assert powers previously invoked during times of military conflict or natural disaster takes presidential prerogative to a new level.
If he succeeds, how will Trump next seek to impose his will on Americans? And what about the next president?