Supreme Court Allows Trump To Build 100 Miles Of Wall With Military Funds

[Cletus]

Will anyone miss Fort Bragg being shut down to pay for it?

Fort Bragg will not be shut down. It is the home of the country's Quick Reaction Force. Unless they relocate the 82d and the Special Warfare Center, Fort Bragg will be active long after you are dust.

[Tahuyaman]

Will anyone miss Fort Bragg being shut down to pay for it?

Where did you get that idea?

[Peter1469]

Where did you get that idea?

He slept through the months and months of discussions here about the National Emergencies Act and the other laws that allow for the reprogramming of previously appropriated US Army Corps of Engineers funds to build the wall. Or he just doesn't know what he is talking about.

[stjames1_53]

He slept through the months and months of discussions here about the National Emergencies Act and the other laws that allow for the reprogramming of previously appropriated US Army Corps of Engineers funds to build the wall. Or he just doesn't know what he is talking about.

Probably the latter.........

[stjames1_53]

Where did you get that idea?

from the bottom side of his brain................

[donttread]

Supreme Court Allows Trump To Build 100 Miles Of Wall With Military Funds
Kevin Daley

• The Supreme Court lifted lower court orders barring the administration from using $2.5 billion in military funds to finance construction of the border wall in a Friday evening decision.
• The ruling, called a stay, allows the government to start construction on 100 miles of border wall while litigation continues in the lower courts.
• The plaintiffs in Friday’s case said they would ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to process the dispute as quickly as possible, in a bid to slow progress on construction.

The Supreme Court allowed President Donald Trump to reprogram $2.5 billion in Pentagon funds to start construction on 100 miles of border wall in a late Friday order.
The five conservative justices voted with the government in full. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan indicated their full dissent. Justice Stephen Breyer proposed a compromise in a partial dissent.

“The government has made a sufficient showing at this stage that the plaintiffs have no cause of action to obtain review,” the Court’s order reads.
President Trump declared a national emergency at the southern border on Feb. 15 after Congress refused to appropriate sufficient funds for border barriers. Pursuant to that proclamation, administration officials announced plans to reprogram $600 million from the Treasury Department’s forfeiture fund; $2.5 billion from Defense Department counter-narcotics activities; and $3.6 billion from military construction projects to finance construction of the wall.
The $2.5 billion for counter-drug efforts were at issue in Friday’s case. That sum was slated to finance fencing in Arizona, California, and New Mexico. Government lawyers said those projects are priorities for the Department of Homeland Security, as they are meant to deter narcotic trafficking in major drug smuggling corridors. The administration moved the funds pursuant to a transfer statute that allows such reallocations to address “unforeseen needs,” provided they have not been “denied by the Congress.”
A plaintiffs coalition of environmentalists led by the Sierra Club sued the administration to stop the reassignment. The plaintiffs said they have “recreational and aesthetic interests” in habitats near the border, like “hiking, birdwatching, [and] photography.” The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) represents the plaintiffs.
In court papers, the administration said the green groups do not have standing to bring a lawsuit, arguing the transfer statute does not protect their “recreational and aesthetic interests.”
U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam sided with the plaintiffs in June and barred the government from reprogramming the contested funds. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed on a 2-1 vote July 3, noting Congress furnished just $1.375 billion for border barriers, instead of the $5.7 billion the president requested. By the court’s reading, that meant the wall projects funded by the $2.5 billion had been “denied by the Congress.”
“As for the public interest, we conclude that it is best served by respecting the Constitution’s assignment of the power of the purse to Congress, and by deferring to Congress’s understanding of the public interest as reflected in its repeated denial of more funding for border barrier construction,” Judge Michelle Friedland wrote.
The Department of Justice takes a narrower view of the transfer statute. The bar on reprogramming funds for items “denied by the Congress,” refers to specific requests made during the appropriations process and not “a ‘border wall’ writ large,” the government argues.

The Trump administration then filed an emergency stay application at the Supreme Court, asking the justices to put the 9th Circuit’s ruling on hold while litigation continues. Government lawyers asked the Court to resolve the matter by Friday July 26 due to budget constraints. By their telling, the monies at issue will not be available for allocation after the fiscal year ends on Sept. 30 and the Department of Defense needs several months to finalize contracts.
The high court’s order granting the application indicates that a majority of the Court agrees with the government that the environmentalists do not have standing to challenge the transfer.
Breyer sought a compromise, suggesting that the government could finalize its contracts without beginning construction on any particular projects.
“I would grant the government’s application to stay the injunction only to the extent that the injunction prevents the government from finalizing the contracts or taking other preparatory administrative action, but leave it in place insofar as it precludes the government from disbursing those funds or beginning construction,” Breyer wrote.
The case will now return to a lower court for further proceedings. The ACLU said it would ask the 9th Circuit to process the case quickly, thereby blunting whatever progress the administration might make on construction in the interim.
“This is not over,” ACLU staff attorney Dror Ladin said after Friday’s decision. “We will be asking the federal appeals court to expedite the ongoing appeals proceeding to halt the irreversible and imminent damage from Trump’s border wall.”
“Border communities, the environment, and our Constitution’s separation of powers will be permanently harmed should Trump get away with pillaging military funds for a xenophobic border wall Congress denied,” he added.
House Democrats brought their own lawsuit against the administration after President Trump announced plans to finance the wall with reprogrammed funds. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden dismissed the case in June, calling it a political fight between the two political branches that the courts should not resolve.
The case is No. 19A60 Trump v. Sierra Club.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/26/s...r-wall-ruling/

I laugh.....zenophobic? Really?
Here all along I thought we were trying to limit the crime coming across our borders. That has zip to do with racism.
Stupid f'rs want to protect birds that can fly over the wall, but ignore the issue that has a higher impact on our nation.

I can kid of see using military dollars for 2 reasons. One it is a national border. Two military spending is even less scrutinized than other government spending is. I hope the 100 miles won't chew up the whole 2.5 billion. Even by military spending standards that would be insane. Only 25 mill a mile though. I take it this wall would be without the gaps the old wall has?

[MMC]

I can kid of see using military dollars for 2 reasons. One it is a national border. Two military spending is even less scrutinized than other government spending is. I hope the 100 miles won't chew up the whole 2.5 billion. Even by military spending standards that would be insane. Only 25 mill a mile though. I take it this wall would be without the gaps the old wall has?

Did you mean the 10ft high chain link fence Democrats had put up?

[Peter1469]

I can kid of see using military dollars for 2 reasons. One it is a national border. Two military spending is even less scrutinized than other government spending is. I hope the 100 miles won't chew up the whole 2.5 billion. Even by military spending standards that would be insane. Only 25 mill a mile though. I take it this wall would be without the gaps the old wall has?

The US Corps of Engineers money is used because of the specific statutory authority. Money from other government accounts are also being used based on other statutory authority.

[MMC]

I think, but I could be wrong, that it was issued under an emergency order.
Either way, it's another win for Trump
We keep winning and the libs keep crying in their cups.
Trump in 2020

Yep another win for Trump.....and SCOTUS gets to $#@!slap down another leftist Judge.

[MMC]

This is from the Serra Club litigation. Since SCOTUS already ruled that the new DHS authority to sidestep environmental laws for border construction is Constitutional, they had no reason to maintain the injunction while the rest of the case proceeds.

And yet the 4 left-tards on the SCOTUS couldn't even rule appropriately over established process.