Tag: 9th circuit court

Build “the Wall”


A section of the Wall near El Paso, TX, January 19, 2019. Photo credit: Shutterstock.com

Real walls matter, so long as they are observed and backed by effective enforcement of boundary rules. This is true for the most modest private property and for the most powerful nation. We have seen several encouraging developments in American national sovereignty and regional security in the past week or so. These developments ranged from at least a temporary green light for border wall construction, to an important power in the hemisphere declaring Hezbollah a terrorist group.

Slowing Sanctuary Scam?


Trump thumbs upA three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a district (trial-level) judge’s decision on funding of sanctuary cities, and with it another fraudulent nation-wide injunction by a mere district judge. Voting 2-1, with two George W. Bush appointees, Judges Sandra Ikuta and Jay Bybee, supporting President Trump and the Clinton appointee, Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw, supporting the California and national Democrats’ position.

Here is the decision [PDF], in City of Los Angeles v Barr, handed down on July 12, 2019. From the case summary:

The panel reversed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the City of Los Angeles in an action challenging the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”)’s use of certain factors in determining scores for applicants to a competitive grant program – the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant program – that allocates a limited pool of funds to state and local applicants under the Public Safety Partnership and Community Policing Act (the “Act”), enacted as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act.

The 411 on the Latest National Emergency


President Trump’s declaration, on 15 February 2019, of a “national emergency,” is quite ordinary, the latest in a long line of such declarations going back to President Carter. Far from creating some dangerous precedent, it only reinforces our constitutional order. While it will certainly be challenged in federal court, this may actually be the opportunity to set Article III courts back on their proper path, ending bad behavior by the lowest level, federal district judges.

The Ricochet editors desk posted the entire text of the declaration in Trump Declares National Emergency at the Southern Border. The text is quoted from the White House page, Presidential Proclamation on Declaring a National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States. C-SPAN has the video and transcript of President Trump’s remarks, followed by some hostile questions on the lawn.

In his remarks beforehand, President Trump repeatedly invoked Angel Moms and had them stand with the photograph of their dead loved one. These women, seated in the front row, turned and put the inconvenient truth into the face of the media who have pointedly ignored their loss. Do watch the video.

The “411” on “National Emergency”


Sadly, supposedly expert, professional commentators have continued the lazy practice of bloviating rather than elucidating. Let’s circle back around and lay out the law on “national emergencies.” It is right there for anyone who can read to read, without any special permissions: 50 U.S. Code Subchapter II – DECLARATIONS OF FUTURE NATIONAL EMERGENCIES. Let’s all do a bit of reading together, and then I invite members with relevant legal experience to comment on any relevant case law.

Consider the following law. Think very carefully through the very first sentence. As with some many other areas, where Congress feels a need to “do something” but doesn’t know how to specify, to clearly limit, the usual result is a vague grant of authority to the Executive branch.

Declare National Border Emergency, Kill Two Birds with One Stone



Talk of President Trump building the border wall under a declaration of national emergency seemed fanciful, unanchored in law. While major media including Fox News have done no more than wave the term around, a lawyer and talk show host for Urban Family Talk actually laid out the law. There is a case for building under a national emergency, and if the President takes this route, there is also an opportunity to force the federal judiciary back under the Constitution.

The case for “wall” construction under national emergency powers:

We celebrate the SCOTUS ruling that, to no sane person’s surprise, the suspension of President Trump’s ban on travel from “six predominantly Muslim countries” was an absurd invasion by judicial activists into the blatantly Executive functions of the government. This is, as you have guessed, the Harvard Lunch Club Political Podcast, episode 128, with our guest Jessica Vaughan from the Center for Immigration Studies.

(Apologies that this episode has some serious unbalance to the audio – we will be improving the technology in the coming weeks. Thanks for your patience).