First, I agree with French that the President does not have inherent, unilateral authority - as a constitutional matter - to build the wall.
That's the lesson of Youngstown (the Steel Seizure cases)
Trump must be able to point to statutory authority.
I also agree with French that 10 USC § 2808 doesn't provide the necessary authority, for the reasons French talks about. It would be very difficult to characterize the wall as a "military construction project."
Where I disagree with French is on the proper construction of 33 USC § 2293, which French helpfully lays out here.
I think this gives President Trump the authority to direct the Secretary of Defense to allocate funds to constructing a physical barrier on the border.
French makes two basic arguments as to why this statute does *not* allow for funding to be redirected to further construction:
1) such a project has not been "authorized" 2) there is no credible showing that border barriers are "essential to our national defense"
As for the first argument, I simply think French is wrong. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 gives broad authority to the DHS Secretary to "secure operational control of the border" with "physical infrastructure."
To my knowledge this Act has not been repealed or amended.
The same act goes on to define "operational control" in very stark terms - the prevention of "all unlawful entries" into the United States.
This is a remarkable grant of power!
What's missing? Funding.
French's second objection - that the project is not "necessary to the national defense" - seems a much weaker argument.
He says "there has been no showing."
But the statute does not require such a showing - or provide a mechanism to contest such a showing!
I think that French's reading of this statute is cramped - especially when we're talking about a statute granting *emergency powers*.
The DHS Secretary is commanded to stop all unlawful entry and authorized to build physical infrastructure to do so. That's "authorized."
FIN
Moreover, my reading is supported by the Congressional Research Service's analysis of the statutory framework for border wall construction, available here:
For example, this, from CRS, saying that DHS has refrained from building more physical infrastructure for policy reasons, not because they lack statutory authorization:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Earlier today we highlighted some individual prosecution decisions made by the now-suspended State Attorney Monique Worrell.
Now, let’s take a broader look at @GovRonDeSantis’ executive order to see how Worrell was derelict in her duty.
We’ll start with gun crime.
Florida has mandatory minimum sentences for gun crimes.
The Osceola County Sheriff’s Office referred 58 non-homicide Robbery with a Firearm cases to Worrell’s office in 2021 and 2022.
As of May 2023, only one mandatory minimum sentence had been imposed in any of those cases.
That Sheriff’s office also referred 11 non-homicide Carjacking with a Firearm cases and 14 non-homicide Home Invasion Robbery with a Firearm cases during that period.
Out of those arrests, only one resulted in a mandatory minimum sentence being imposed.
Today, @GovRonDeSantis suspended State Attorney Monique Worrell for dereliction of duty and incompetence.
Here are some examples of her policies or practices in action.
Daton Viel was arrested in March 2023 for sexual battery on a minor, as well as Lewd and Lascivious Molestation.
That arrest was made while Viel was on probation for another offense. Viel was still let out on bond.
This past weekend, Viel shot two Orlando Police Officers.
In November 2022, 17-year-old Lorenzo Larry shot and killed his pregnant girlfriend, De’Shayla Ferguson.
Larry had previously been arrested in May 2022 for carrying a concealed firearm, possession of a firearm on school property, and criminal possession of a firearm by a minor.
How do you take a movie about something as consequential as the Manhattan Project and make it about things as picayune and trivial as the denial of a security clearance and the failed confirmation of a minor cabinet secretary
Yes I watched the movie and understood the plot, I’m saying that portion of the story was simply uninteresting
In case it wasn't obvious: Trump might not be "the establishment," but he has built an establishment around him that behaves almost exactly the way the old establishment did
There's a reason that the vast majority of Trump's endorsements are coming from sitting legislators - and particularly House members
They are the people he can threaten with primary challenges
But this is what establishments do - "plata o promo" to enforce ideological conformity
The old establishment enforced neoconservatism
The new one enforces the idea that Trump is the greatest person EVER