The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether President Donald Trump unconstitutionally usurped Congress’ spending power by diverting Defense Department funds to pay for expansion and reinforcement of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
The high court’s announcement in a routine order list Monday morning was widely expected because in July 2019 the justices allowed construction of the wall with disputed funds to proceed by staying a lower court injunction.
The justices typically grant review after issuing a stay like the one last year, particularly in a high-profile legal fight like the one over Trump’s border wall. At issue in the case is the president's February 2019 move to repurpose about $6 billion in military construction and counterdrug appropriations to finance the wall, ending a budget standoff with Congress and a partial government shutdown.
The president’s spending maneuver came after Congress agreed to spend only $1.375 billion in that fiscal year for border wall improvements, billions less than Trump was demanding. Trump’s actions triggered lawsuits from various quarters, including border groups, environmentalists, 20 states and the Democratic-led House of Representatives.
The Supreme Court case could divide the justices along ideological lines if the vote turns out to be similar to the action on the stay, which was granted by the court’s five Republican-appointed justices and opposed by the four Democratic appointees.
One of the liberals, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, died in September. Trump has nominated appeals court Judge Amy Coney Barrett to fill the vacancy. The Senate could vote to approve her nomination within days.
The border wall case, which involves interpretation of the executive branch’s authority to shift funds between budget accounts, will likely be heard early next year.
The Supreme Court also announced Monday that it will take up another immigration-related Trump initiative, the so-called Remain in Mexico policy under which most asylum applicants who present themselves at the southwest border are returned to Mexico to await a hearing before an immigration judge.
As with the border wall, the Supreme Court granted a stay that allowed the administration to press on with the asylum policy. The high court’s action in March of this year allowed the program, formally known as the “Migrant Protection Protocols,” to continue.
However, due to the coronavirus, the hearings conducted near the border under the “Remain in Mexico” policy were suspended in March and have not yet resumed. As a result, most asylum applicants who arrived at the southwest border are effectively stranded in Mexico.
The Trump administration has said the policy is needed to prevent a rush of asylum seekers who could overwhelm border posts, endangering border officers and routine border-crossers. Critics say making the asylum applicants return to Mexico is callous because of the dangers they face there, including from widespread drug-related violence.
“Remain in Mexico” could also become a vehicle for the Supreme Court to weigh in on an increasingly contentious legal issue: when and whether individual federal judges have the power to issue an injunction that applies nationwide and protects individuals not party to the litigation. In the asylum case, a district court judge blocked the policy nationwide but the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals later narrowed the injunction to only the two southern border states in its jurisdiction: Arizona and California.
"case" - Google News
October 19, 2020 at 09:48PM
https://ift.tt/2TbCT7u
Supreme Court to hear case over Trump border wall - POLITICO
"case" - Google News
https://ift.tt/37dicO5
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Supreme Court to hear case over Trump border wall - POLITICO"
Post a Comment