SCOTUS let’s Trump Proceed on Border Wall

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mgguy, Jul 26, 2019.

  1. mgguy macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #1
    Another big win for Trump.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/26/us/politics/supreme-court-border-wall-trump.html

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday gave President Trump a victory in his fight for a wall along the Mexican border by allowing the administration to begin using $2.5 billion in Pentagon money for the construction.

    In a 5-to-4 ruling, the court overturned an appellate decision and said that the administration could tap the money while litigation over the matter proceeds. But that will most likely take many months or longer, allowing Mr. Trump to move ahead before the case returns to the Supreme Court after further proceedings in the appeals court.


     
  2. appleisking macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    #2
    And another big loss for anyone who cares about the constitution and separation of powers.
     
  3. Solver macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    USA
    #3
    People that would like to see America’s national defense crippled are not going to like this.
     
  4. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #4

    So you’re saying that it only takes a few billion dollars to cripple the US military?
     
  5. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #5
    With Trump opening up Pandora’s box, expect to see other Presidents using this as an option, say spending funds on addressing climate change...
     
  6. Zenithal macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #6
    Should be enough to cover the first layer of cement.
     
  7. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #7

    A few miles worth at least.
     
  8. statik13 macrumors regular

    statik13

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2008
    #8
    Or gun control....
     
  9. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #9
    I've seen a lot of comments that this represents a victory, but it's narrowly-tailored. SCOTUS ruled that a lower court's injunction should be stayed at the case moves forward, but they did not rule in favor of the Trump administration's skullduggery in using DoD money to build border barriers.

    The decision is simply that the balance of a stay falls toward the government, and it's likely that the court's will rule against the Trump administration's sneaky use of 8005 and "reprogramming" money to take Defense funding and use it for a completely different agency.
     
  10. Apple OC macrumors 68040

    Apple OC

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Location:
    Hogtown
    #10
    Imagine if $2.5 Billion spent in the most needed places actually makes a huge difference in illegal border crossing?

    This looks grim for the folks looking to abolish ICE and decriminalize crossing the border illegally.

    This is called MAGA
     
  11. hulugu, Jul 26, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2019

    hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #11
    Arguably, considering the Trump administration has spent $1.57 billion to build 1.7 miles of border barries wall, I suspect very little.

    All in all, about $6.1 billion has been given to the wall, both to CBP and the Defense Department already and all told, DHS wants to build 336 miles of new wall.

    And, the cons at the WeBuildtheWall once said they would spend $6 to $8 million for every mile of their wall, done on private land, using private contractors to build a small chuck of wall near El Paso.
     
  12. Zenithal macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #12
    If you were a civilian entity, sure. When you're a government entity, you get charged more because things meet certain criteria. Compaction, aggregate, and metal (rebar and wire) should take up a bulk just for the base of the wall, which has to go deep to remain a deterrent.
     
  13. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #13


    HAHA that’s funny
     
  14. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #14
     
  15. mgguy thread starter macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #15
    But the money will likely be spent before the case cycles back to SCOTUS, and SCOTUS might still ultimately rule in Trump’s favor, opening the way for further shifting of funds to expand the wall.
     
  16. ThisBougieLife macrumors 68000

    ThisBougieLife

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, California
    #16
    Yes, Trump and his supporters have scored more political points and they can sure "stick it to the libs" while wasting money on a vanity project that will not actually solve the immigration problem.
     
  17. mgguy, Jul 26, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2019

    mgguy thread starter macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #17
    No one thing can solve all problems associated with illegal immigration. The wall may help slow illegal entries and give law enforcement more time to apprehend offenders.
     
  18. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Location:
    Velvet Green
    #18
    The primary way to deal with illegal immigration is to stabilize Latin America, so that none of its countries are places that people feel they need to flee. It could be done. No wall would be of help in solving the real problem.
     
  19. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    A foolish decision by the conservative courts. Expect president Ocasio-Cortez to use the precedent for green new deal.
     
  20. mgguy thread starter macrumors 6502

    mgguy

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    #20
    What would really be foolish is electing AOC as President.
     
  21. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #21
    So, best case scenario, the agency spends money in a way it shouldn’t have, ignoring Congress and violating the separation of powers. Or, the agency has spent the money and only after the fact, the Justices agree? That’s not the way things should be done, and we all know that if Obama had pulled this stunt, the right would be apoplectic. All for barriers that will harm at least four wildlife refuges, including a major watershed and be surmounted by anyone capable of cobbling together a ladder.
     
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    I’m sure it will happen. She’ll easily raise the money and get the base out.

    Especially as the Republicans have flushed all their principles down the toilet.
     
  23. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    quae tangit perit Trump
    #23
    Way to miss the point. Just insert any Democrat and any policy and imagine how such a person could try to intentionally ignore Congress and pull money from other priorities to fund a pet project under the guise of “national security.”
     
  24. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Location:
    Velvet Green
    #24
    Remember, though, in situations where it looks like a Democrat might come in and repair the damage, lame-duck Rs frantically change the rules to hamstring the incoming D so that nothing good can be accomplished (cf. North Carolina, Wisconsin). You can hope, but things are not going to get better before they get a lot worse.
     
  25. mudslag macrumors regular

    mudslag

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #25

    No less than Trump
     

Share This Page

68 July 26, 2019