National Emergency - How far can Trump take it?

The President of the United States, Donald Trump, is about to declare a national emergency to Build The Wall! Despite many efforts and compromises by the President, the Democrats in the House simply will not budge on the request for a measley 5.7bn to fund his campaign promise to build a wall along the southern border.

In fact, the Pentagon is already underway working to determine what steps need to be taken to do just this.

USA Today

The Pentagon is preparing options to build barriers on the southern border in the event that President Donald Trump declares a national emergency there, the latest indication such a move is gaining traction within the administration.

"The Department of Defense is reviewing available authorities and funding mechanisms to identify options to enable border barrier construction," said Navy Capt. Bill Speaks, a Pentagon spokesman. "As there has not been such a declaration made, it would be inappropriate to comment further on those efforts."

The confirmation of the preparations comes after Trump on Thursday gave his most explicit warning yet that he was considering a declaration of a national emergency as a way of freeing up funds for a border wall if talks with Democrats fail to yield a deal on his signature issue.

A wall is coming. But is that all?

I simply do not know enough about the Emergency Powers Act beyond what Wikipedia can tell me, so I'm asking for some guidance here. Is the POTUS setting himself up for even more actions besides building a wall to address the US border crisis? What kinds of things would those be?

Could we see Trump take some action to punish employers of illegal aliens?

Might the POTUS enact mini-Guantanamo Bay's in order to house and interrogate drug and human traffickers?

I want the Wall built, but not at the cost of too much power being assumed. And from what I see here, the POTUS had broad power once invoked.

a reply to: Tempter

President Trump from today:

Should Dems hold up they money, “I have absolute right to declare a national emergency. The lawyers have so advised me.”

If we don’t make a deal, it would be very surprising to me that I would not declare a national emergency and just fund it.” After saying he had to “get a win” or would declare a national emergency to get funding for his Wall, Trump added he’s “okay with compromise.”

Source

At this point I'm almost certain new ground will be broke this summer should the POTUS assume Emergency Powers, but the question is what ELSE under this act can he do?

I do not think he's as limited as people might think he is once a national emergency has been invoked. I suppose it all comes down to how the declaration is written.

originally posted by: Tempter
At this point I'm almost certain new ground will be broke this summer should the POTUS assume Emergency Powers, but the question is what ELSE under this act can he do?

I do not think he's as limited as people might think he is once a national emergency has been invoked. I suppose it all comes down to how the declaration is written.

8 previous admins did this as well and it was perfectly legal to do so.

a reply to: Tempter

The real limiting factor here (not that limiting, but certainly a factor which will make the Dems look ridiculous if it comes to this) is that I don't think the POTUS can issue the Wall as a standard Request for Quotes/Plans from civilian contractors. My understanding is, if it ends up being he and he alone who authorizes it as a National Security edict, the Army Corps of Engineers would be the designing and constructing body. That would be a black eye to the Dems because it would mean their hubris and childishness prevented the wealth of this endeavor from being used to supply domestic construction jobs in a region which needs them.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Tempter

The real limiting factor here (not that limiting, but certainly a factor which will make the Dems look ridiculous if it comes to this) is that I don't think the POTUS can issue the Wall as a standard Request for Quotes/Plans from civilian contractors. My understanding is, if it ends up being he and he alone who authorizes it as a National Security edict, the Army Corps of Engineers would be the designing and constructing body. That would be a black eye to the Dems because it would mean their hubris and childishness prevented the wealth of this endeavor from being used to supply domestic construction jobs in a region which needs them.

Nah... CNN will have endless interviews of poor starving local contractors that would have been OK if it just wasn't for Orange Man Now Hitler who used the Military.

And their base will eat it up.

The Cult of Statism.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

The Army Corp of Engineers contracts most of their construction projects out. Contracts must follow the FAR. I am not aware of the Engineers ever taking on a project this big without contract most of it out. The engineers then manage the contracts.

Please recall they are trained as "Combat" engineers, not general contractors to perform construction.

DHS has has the lead for border security since 9/11.

I just want to know that it is legal for him to do so.
And if it is, the dems have to know that, right?
So why would they want him to go that route? Maybe that is the plan?
But why? What are they up to, if so?

Just don't trust them, and feel like they are up to something.
Besides trying to make him look bad, as per their MO.

a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

I'm a civil engineer, so I've worked often on ACOE contracts. They can design and they can construct when needed, usually that entails battlefield or disaster zone projects. My understanding is that it would be difficult for them to permit a contract outside of the military heirarchy to get the project designed and constructed in absence of a Congressionally approved project budget. That means they'd have to do it in-house.

I think I am correct in saying that the US has been operating under a State of Emergency for over 100 years.. based on old decisions that have never been closed down or are still relevant. I read somewhere there are over 30 'live' national emergencies. The last one was put in place about 4 months ago relating to foreign interference in elections. Yes, you heard that right... no cries of Hitler from CNN then, but stopping the flow of millions of illegal aliens flooding into the country. well, now that's not an emergency of course.

The only real difference now to the relative ease of initiating a state of emergency is based on the 1976 act whereby the Preseident now has to be explicit on the powers he will use.

As always, don't belive anything you hear or see in the media. A National emergency is actually not uncommon and is certainly not a war time thing only.

originally posted by: chiefsmom
I just want to know that it is legal for him to do so.
And if it is, the dems have to know that, right?
So why would they want him to go that route? Maybe that is the plan?
But why? What are they up to, if so?

Just don't trust them, and feel like they are up to something.
Besides trying to make him look bad, as per their MO.

yes it is perfectly legal. its within his powers as president.

a reply to: chiefsmom

They've painted themselves into a corner.
After all their shrieking they can't compromise on anything or they'll get tarred and feathered by their mindless hoards.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

First, they do not have the lead for for this project DHS does.

Secondly, they do not have the equipment or manpower to build a nearly 2000 mile wall. Finally, they contract out almost every construction project that they do take on. The are the PM's for the project, and do acquisition and contract management. But they contract out the actual construction. Just look at their budget , the OMB dashboard, or any other metric you like.

Not to be contentious, but the Engineers are not going to build this wall in house. Just think of the requirements for footings alone, and how much cement that would require. Are the Army engineers going to open up gravel quarries all over the southwest, manufacture their own portland cement, source their own aggregate and sand?

Not likely.

Anyway it is a mute point. DHS has the lead.

originally posted by: chiefsmom
I just want to know that it is legal for him to do so.
And if it is, the dems have to know that, right?
So why would they want him to go that route? Maybe that is the plan?
But why? What are they up to, if so?

Just don't trust them, and feel like they are up to something.
Besides trying to make him look bad, as per their MO.

Yes, it is within the President's constitutional authority to do this.
Don't foget he IS the President. The most powerful person in gov't, despite the verbiage of equal and separate branches of govt. As always, however, the US system creates some balance by giving Congress the power to end a National Emergency by vote.

Of course the Dems know all this. Thier play, obvious of course, is to use their campaign arm (the media) to make comparisons to Hitler and scare the American people into believing they ae minutes from the gas chamber.

a reply to: watchitburn

See, my conspiracy mind thinks it is more than that.
They are just so shifty.

They could scream about him doing this, for 2020, for their masses to be outraged, to get the votes. I don't know.
But it just feels like they are trying to pull something, knowing he can go around them.

I really hope I am giving them too much credit. LOL

a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey

I disagree as does the POTUS.
www.dailycrusader.com...

DHS would have oversight, yes. But the funds are going to ultimately come out of the Pentagon, which means the COE will be doing the heavy lifting and operate as the lead. Obviously, there will be private material contracts involved for furnishing equipment and materials... that's considered part and parcel to presidential authority to order any National Security project be undertaken. What I don't think they can do is negotiate a contract for plans, risk, and labor. That would be done in house under this scenario and yes, the COE ABSOLUTELY has manpower resources at their disposal to get that job done themselves. The design has largely been complete, the Corps has already done a lot of the preliminary geotech work www.nytimes.com...

The United States Army Corps of Engineers has begun preliminary preparations for the construction of segments of a wall in several places along the border with Mexico, the Department of Homeland Security said on Tuesday.

Engineers are drilling and taking soil samples to determine what type of barriers would be most effective in the different types of geography along the border, said David Lapan, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security.

This project has ACOE written all over it, man. I don't know what your background is, but I'd place my own against it on these types of projects. Half of my career has involved major ACOE coordination, design, project management, and construction owners oversight work. Their Civil Works and Construction division is well manned and, if they do hit a manpower glut, the Navy and Air Force have engineer support divisions who can backfill any needs. Construction labor could be conducted largely with Reserve troops and already contracted civilian equipment operators.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

OK. I appreciate your credentials.

What I don't think they can do is negotiate a contract for plans, risk, and labor.

I agree that the PM and contractor oversight will be government. That cannot be done by anyone else, as it is an expressly government function as described in the FAR.

However the labor and materials will be contracted out, in my estimate. It is like the old saying "NASA didn't put a man on the moon...Contractors did."

I am not going to get into an argument over credentials. I will say that I make it my Business to understand how the Federal Government does all aspects of procurement, from the Congressional appropriation process all the way through solicitation, contract types, technical evaluations, award, delivery, inspection and acceptance and closeout.

You must understand this language.

Also, if you look at how botched the first few RFQ's were for prototypes, and how the government could not describe the requirement or evaluation criteria, you must know that aside from this being a high-profile politically charged series of procurements, but also that all it will take is one protest to send the schedule into into PM hell. I don't think they will break ground for at least two years after the funds are available. And as you know, the anti-deficiency act prevents them from even releasing a solicitation prior to having funds.

I guess we will see.

Thanks for your professional help to our government. The civilian government partnership is a bond that keeps our contry strong.

a reply to: FilthyUSMonkey



I don't know what the lead in time for this will be. For a normal project, your 2 year minimum is pretty accurate... once the National Security tag is slapped onto this, we've entered the realm of precedent. Historically, the courts have quickly sided with the feds when National Security is mentioned, which speeds through a great deal of the red tape and third party obstructions. I'd expect this to got to the SCOTUS rapidly, which may speed things up.

I think you should ask Nancy Pelosi, she's in charge of obstruction.
I would hope President Trump Prevails and does NOT give in.