“Terminate. With extreme prejudice”.
Though there’s a chance that the measure could pass the Senate, the vote would ultimately be merely symbolic. Trump has threatened to veto the resolution, and it’s doubtful that enough Republicans in the Senate will back the resolution to ensure a veto-proof majority.
Moot point given that not enough Republicans in the House voted for it to ensure a veto-proof majority.
Immaterial, I think. This is just meant to shine a light on the cockroaches. This is headed for court.
I get that. But the fact that it doesn’t have a veto proof majority in the House makes speculation about the Senate immaterial.
One of those R-votes was from the only R who represents a district that’s on the border.
wrong.
This vote is far more than symbolic. The Supreme Court would be well justified in tossing out Trump’s phony emergency – he has more or less dared them to be speaking so freely about his actual motives – but if the Supreme Court wants an easy way out they can say that the ‘emergency’ is a political question between the other two branches and Congress blinked.
No because the Senate is forced to vote. So all GOP Senators will have to go on record stating if they value more Trumps agenda than the Constitution.
Why? As long as it passes both houses it heads to Trump’s desk where he must veto it. A veto proof house vote has no material effect on it. The votes (in both houses) are recorded, hence the shining a light metaphor.
I think that would be Will Hurd R-TX 23.
Y
Thomas Massie Ky. 4
Y
Justin Amash Mich. 3
Y
Fred Upton Mich. 6
Y
Elise Stefanik N.Y. 21
Y
Greg Walden Ore. 2
Y
Brian Fitzpatrick Pa. 1
Y
Dusty Johnson S.D.
Y
Will Hurd Tex. 23
Y
Jaime Herrera Beutler Wash. 3
Y
Cathy McMorris Rodgers Wash. 5
Y
Jim Sensenbrenner Wis. 5
Y
Mike Gallagher Wis. 8
I want to see the list of 13 Republicans who voted to uphold the constitution vs. propping up Trump’s ego and (they believe) reelection. The other 182 Republicans can go back to mama Russia, and hopefully the Democrats will wrap this vote around some of their necks come 2020, and then shove it several places where the sun don’t shine come 2021 when president Klobachar/Harris/Beto/Biden, etc uses their vote to justify the actual emergencies on global warming, guns, health care, election fraud, etc.
Well, we finally have a solid vote as proof that Republicans are more interested in supporting their party and Trump than they are in defending the Constitution and the inherent power of the legislative branch. It really now can be said that they are in favor of a dictatorship, they just said so with their votes.
And we should campaign on that basis for a generation.
As others have said, the Senate has to vote on this w/i 18 days, and the motion can’t be filibustered, it just takes 50 votes.
And why is this so important? Well the Court’s looking at Trump’s power grab will look at it under Justice Jackson’s concurrence in Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co., which is a very valuable, and interesting (and short) read. Opinion is here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/343/579#writing-USSC_CR_0343_0579_ZC2
It is a great piece of writing, and will be the loadstar in looking at Trump’s actions. The key passage is:
When the President acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of Congress, his authority is at its maximum, for it includes all that he possesses in his own right plus all that Congress can delegate. In these circumstances, and in these only, may he be said (for what it may be worth) to personify the federal sovereignty. If his act is held unconstitutional under these circumstances, it usually means that the Federal Government, as an undivided whole, lacks power. A seizure executed by the President pursuant to an Act of Congress would be supported by the strongest of presumptions and the widest latitude of judicial interpretation, and the burden of persuasion would rest heavily upon any who might attack it.
2. When the President acts in absence of either a congressional grant or denial of authority, he can only rely upon his own independent powers, but there is a zone of twilight in which he and Congress may have concurrent authority, or in which its distribution is uncertain. Therefore, congressional inertia, indifference or quiescence may sometimes, at least, as a practical matter, enable, if not invite, measures on independent presidential responsibility. In this area, any actual test of power is likely to depend on the imperatives of events and contemporary imponderables, rather than on abstract theories of law.
3. When the President takes measures incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb, for then he can rely only upon his own constitutional powers minus any constitutional powers of Congress over the matter. Courts can sustain exclusive presidential control in such a case only by disabling the Congress from acting upon the subject. Presidential claim to a power at once so conclusive and preclusive must be scrutinized with caution, for what is at stake is the equilibrium established by our constitutional system.
Actually 2 votes short in the Senate. Susan Collins plays that spunky semi-independent willful spirited rebel, but she ALWAYS ends up doing what she’s told. She’s a good girl at heart, and really just wants to please “Daddy Darth Wattle.”
If the Senate joins the House in rejecting Trump’s phony emergency declaration, any subsequent Trump veto wouldn’t stop this action from showing the Supreme Court that a bipartisan majority in Congress agreed there is no emergency. If Congress agrees no emergency exists, it proves there is no emergency.
This is very important.
13 Republicans
Fucking pathetic.
The NBC affiliate in Connecticut wrote the following for its lede on FB:
Democrats ignored a veto threat Tuesday and rammed legislation through the House that would stymie President Donald Trump’s bid for billions of extra dollars for his border wall, escalating a clash over whether Trump was abusing his powers to advance his paramount campaign pledge.
Rammed through the legislation. Good Lord.
the vote would ultimately be merely symbolic.
Not so fast. Even if vetoed, and there are not enough votes to over-ride the veto, it is still important in that it would set a clear record that Congress was not authorizing the illegal abuse of funds by Trump. This will aid the lawsuit(s) that are challenging Trump’s un-Constitutional power-grab with his fake “emergency” declaration.