Time For the GOP to Take a Stand

[EasyAce]

Editorial
https://thebulwark.com/time-for-the-gop-to-take-a-stand/

With the House of Representatives expected to vote Tuesday on a resolution overturning President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency to circumvent Congress and build his wall, we thought it might be a good idea to re-up our editorial on the subject. As we argued earlier this month: this should not be a difficult vote for Republicans, especially those who (1) were outraged by President’s Obama use of his executive powers, (2) care about the Constitution’s system of checks and balances, (3) wish to protect Congress’s Article I powers, and (4) recognize the dangerous precedent that the declaration of emergency creates for future presidents.

We do not always agree with Congressman Justin Amash, but he makes a powerful case to his fellow Republicans: “The same congressional Republicans who joined me in blasting Pres. Obama’s executive overreach,” he wrote on Twitter, “now cry out for a king to usurp legislative powers. If your faithfulness to the Constitution depends on which party controls the White House, then you are not faithful to it.”

Indeed, Republican legislators face a time for choosing: Support Trump or the rule of law . . .

. . . Conservatives once understood the concept of “unintended consequences,” and they are not only going to get a refresher course, they are likely to get it good and hard. How bad could it be? The worst-case scenario for the GOP is if Trump’s power grab succeeds. If the courts uphold the president’s sweeping power to declare emergencies and abrogate Congress’s Article I powers, the damage to the constitutional equilibrium is likely to last for generations.

It hardly takes a wizard to imagine how those powers might be exercised by a Democratic president—on climate change, gun rights, healthcare, even trade . . .

[Fishrrman]

On Tuesday, we're gonna find out just who amongst the GOP House Reps are worth keeping, and who ain't...!

[jpsb]

I am having a hard time making up my mind on this issue.

[roamer_1]

I am having a hard time making up my mind on this issue.

Not hard for me - We don't need no damn kings.

[Dexter]

We don't need no damn kings.

Too late.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Not hard for me - We don't need no damn kings.

Oh, stop the hyperbole already @roamer_1 .  Congress gave the President the right to declare an emergency and reallocate money to fund it.

Acting in accordance with law is not the trademark of a "king".



 

[roamer_1]

Acting in accordance with law is not the trademark of a "king".

It is not hyperbole... And your statement is false - A king always acts in accordance with the law.

[jpsb]

It is not hyperbole... And your statement is false - A king always acts in accordance with the law.

Tell that to Anne Boleyn.

[roamer_1]

Tell that to Anne Boleyn.

Marriage - Legit. Screw the pope. Establish the Church of England. Annulment.

Later death by beheading - Legit- Convicted by a jury of her peers.

See how that worked.
There's a king.

[skeeter]

I am having a hard time making up my mind on this issue.

Congress is refusing the federal government's most basic responsibility - protecting the border. Is there a better use of the executive's emergency declaration power as CinC than to step into that void?