Considering the way things are going already, I doubt that they would give it a second thought... since they will do anything they please with or without precedent.
Don’t be so sure. There have been times when precedent they’ve set has been recognized as bad and addressed. FDR served more than two terms. The 22nd Amendment was passed, because of it. JFK appointed his inexperienced brother as AG. Nepotism laws were passed because of it. Serious buyer’s remorse has followed the Reid decision to exercise the nuclear option on judges. It’s the prime reason why you don’t see it used on fiscal matters, even though it’s entirely constitutional. Upholding this decision is a blank check for future expansive executive powers.
Plenty of ‘national’ emergencies are related to situations in foreign countries. For instance, Trump recently extended the Obama era one for the Venezuela situation. If a wall can be built for a national emergency, it can be dismantled for a ‘humanitarian crisis’ later. Even worse, imagine a future Dem declaring a national emergency on the number of illegals here, the costs involved, then ‘solving’ it with amnesty. Now, you have instant legal voters, thanks to the precedent, and you can forget about voting that person out of office.
If we think they’re just going to do whatever they want, let’s drop the idea we care about checks and balances or limited government. Let’s just scrap the constitution, declare Trump president for life, and stop their dictatorship with our own. The ends justify the means, where existential threats are present, right?