Emergency can be more than a money grab

[angrychair]

When a president declares an “national emergency” it gives them almost unlimited power to control the ebb and flow of the lives of all Americans.

From having the right to seize control of all American-flagged sea vessels to shutting down the Internet and controlling everything we see and hear on the Internet, trump now has a huge portfolio of powers to use at his discretion...even it unrelated to the emergency he is declaring.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418/

[Runningdawg]

1. Elections? We don't need no stinkin' elections! Please present you papers to the men at your door.

[shanti]

2. question:

when is the end date for this "emergency"? November 2019??

[angrychair]

3. According to law

It should be reviewed by congress after 6 months and can be canceled after 12 months or just renewed without action.
No one (meaning congress) has made the effort to review or cancel any emergency power declaration since the National Emergency Act was made law in 1976.

There are over 100 emergency declarations on the books right now.

[shanti]

4. wow

so basically, any president could do anything in any order at anytime?

thanks for the info!

[onenote]

6. Not really. A declaration of a national emergency has to cite a specific statutory authority

previously enacted by Congress that defines what the President can do in case of a national emergency. For example, Trump is citing to a provision in the Defense appropriations legislation that gives him authority to redirect DoD funding to military construction projects.

[angrychair]

8. Yes and no

The declaration has to be specific but nothing on paper actually limits them (a president) to only a specific set of powers under the national emergency act.

[onenote]

9. I disagree

This is the relevant provision that is understood as limiting the president to exercising statutory powers defined specifically in reference to a declaration under the NEA. Indeed, Congress' purpose in enacting the NEA was actually to limit the president from having the sort of unfettered authority to take whatever action they want by declaring an emergency. None of the emergencies declared since 1976 have deviated from this requirement and the fastest way to get an action taken under the NEA invalidated would be to disregard this requirement.

SEC. 301. When the President declares a national emergency, no 50 USC 1631.
powers or authorities made available by statute for use in the event of
an emergency shall be exercised unless and until the President specifies
the provisions of law under which he proposes that he, or other officers
will act. Such specification may be made either in the declaration of a
national emergency, or by one or more contemporaneous or subsequent
Executive orders published in the Federal Register and transmitted to
the Congress.

[angrychair]

10. I hear you

But in the Atlantic article in my OP it clearly states there is nothing to actually stop a president from using any of the existing laws at their disposal.

[onenote]

5. There are 32 emergency declarations currently active, not over 100

I think you may have confused the number of statutory provisions that can be invoked in connection with a declaration of a national emergency (around 120) with the number of current national emergencies (1 declared by Carter, 6 by Clinton, 10 by Bush, 11 by Obama and 4 by Trump).

[angrychair]

7. I stand corrected

Sorry about that. I did flip the numbers in my head...