President
Trump’s decision to declare a national emergency in order to fund his
border wall triggers a crisis for our Constitution and our
democracy.
This is no
longer about the shameless lies, exaggerations and slanders that the
president has trotted out to justify his silly campaign promise to
build a wall (that he promised Mexico would pay for). It’s no longer
about wasting billions of dollars, of shutting down much of the
government for weeks or squandering the time and attention of the Congress
and the American people for an inane campaign promise.
Trump now poses a
fundamental challenge to our democracy: Does Congress have the essential
power of the purse that the Constitution gave it, or can a president at
his whim declare a national emergency and spend what he wants on what he
wills? This is the line between a constitutional republic and a
presidential autocracy. Trump’s petulant response to not getting the
money he wants now puts that question before the Congress and the
courts.
This
is no exaggeration. Trump wants money for the wall. Congress —
both the Republican Senate and the Democratic House — voted not to
give him as much as he demanded. So the president declares a national
emergency and uses money appropriated by the Congress for other
purposes to fund his wall.
Only there is no national emergency. Congress and
presidents have been debating and legislating about our immigration policy and
about border security for years. Contrary to the president’s
hysterical lies, arrests for illegal entry have declined. With the
economy near full employment, there is no economic crisis sparked by
undocumented workers. Contrary to the president’s claims, the wall
won’t stem the flow of illegal drugs into America, the vast bulk of
which come through legal ports of entry.
Even the president in his news
conference admitted that he didn’t need the money; he just wanted to
build the wall faster. All we have is a normal dispute between a
president and a Congress about spending priorities.
Trump is saying that since he
can’t get what he wants, he’ll simply do it on his own. That
effectively erases the congressional power of the purse — a
foundation of a constitutional republic. If Trump’s decision is upheld
by the Congress and the courts, a chilling precedent will be set.
Most
Americans agree with the Congress and don’t support wasting money on the
wall. Declaring a national emergency to build it is even more
unpopular. When the White House invokes eminent domain to take over hundreds
of miles of privately owned land on the border, public opposition will
grow. But what will stand in the way of a willful president?
Under the National
Emergencies Act of 1976, passed by Congress after Watergate to curb
presidential abuse of national emergency declarations, the Congress can
reject the president’s declaration. The House — with its
Democratic majority — will surely vote to reject. Republicans in
the Senate will then have 15 days to decide whether they are prepared
to back Trump or stand up for our republic against the president, his
Fox TV allies and the right-wing echo machine.
If the Senate rolls over, or the
president vetoes the rejection, the issue will end up in federal
courts, many packed with right-wing activist judges appointed by
Trump.
Right-wing
judges are normally skeptical of exaggerated claims of executive power,
worried that they will be used by liberal presidents to expand the
public sphere. But increasingly, these judges have put partisanship over
constitutional precedent and their own judicial philosophy.
Most recently, for
example, in Trump v. Hawaii, the right-wing gang of five on the
Supreme Court voted — in a 5-4 decision — to overrule the lower
courts and to uphold the president’s Muslim travel ban,
emphasizing the need to show “deference” to presidential authority
in matters of immigration and national security.
If the Senate folds and the
courts roll over, we will be well on our way to an elected
autocracy.
Many people
treated Trump’s posturing over the wall as a diversion, a
low-rent, off-color vaudeville act used to rouse his audiences. The racial
and ethnic slurs that he spread always made it more poisonous than
that. Now his declaration of a national emergency has turned it into a
direct assault on our democracy.
Now we will see who stands with the Constitution,
and who does not.