Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dunamisdeos]

I'm on WIC, we might not get our baby stuff for the month if things get shut down.

Thanks Obama.

[Starver]

So...

Today, I have signed into law H.R. 7213, the “Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of 2018” (the “Act”).  The Act redesignates the Department of Homeland Security’s Domestic Nuclear Detection Office as the Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office (CWMD Office).  The CWMD Office will coordinate with other Federal efforts and develop a strategy and policy to plan for, detect, and protect against unauthorized chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear materials or devices in the United States.

The Act, however, raises constitutional concerns.

Section 2(a)(10) of the Act purports to require the Assistant Secretary for the CWMD Office, a position created by the Act, to consult with certain congressional committees before making any changes in the structure or requirements of the “Securing the Cities” program.  My Administration will treat this provision as advisory.  I hope that consultation will be possible, and I recognize the benefits of working with the Congress on the “Securing the Cities” program.  Nevertheless, the Act’s mandatory consultation provision is not consistent with the Constitution’s separation of powers.

Section 2(g)(6) of the Act purports to require the Secretary of Homeland Security annually to provide a report to the Congress that includes recommendations for any necessary statutory changes regarding the CWMD Office, or, if no statutory changes are deemed necessary, an explanation of that conclusion.  My Administration will treat this provision in a manner consistent with Article II, section 3 of the Constitution, which provides the President the discretion to recommend to the Congress only “such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 21, 2018.

Can't decide if this is a nothingburger (first paragraph's "rename That Thing to This Thing" thing) or if there's something quite disturbingly under-the-radar (the bit about the Securing The Cities program and apparent Constitutional concerns). Not familiar enough with the language and background, etc.


But it's not a statement by the President. That much is obvious.

[Dunamisdeos]

It's more than 128 characters, for starters.

[Trekkin]

It's nothing. Secure the Cities is a very small program by federal budgetary standards and looks like it primarily exists to fund training programs, judging by who it's partnering with, and the constitutional concerns raised are valid; this is fully in DHS' wheelhouse anyway. If it's a power grab, it's an anomalously tiny and reasonable one.

Also, of course Trump didn't sit down and write it personally. No President would; it's trivial. It's still a statement by the President.

[Dunamisdeos]

To be fair this is America, we get nervous when Presidents start talking about WMD's in vague terms.

[Trekkin]

To be fair this is America, we get nervous when Presidents start talking about WMD's in vague terms.

Sure, but Presidents have issued whiny signing statements since Reagan* to communicate how they'll (not) enforce the law. They're just another part of the DC noise; they're not legally binding or anything.

*EDIT: Before someone hurries to correct me straight from Wikipedia, the first signing statement was issued by Monroe. Reagan was just the first to make them about the constitutionality of the law as a routine thing.

[hector13]

US stock markets suffer worst week in a decade.

[Dunamisdeos]

US stock markets suffer worst week in a decade.

Ha ha ha that gettyimage though.

Anyway its the best economic decline, the most powerful decline, everyone agrees.

[Doomblade187]

I'm on WIC, we might not get our baby stuff for the month if things get shut down.

Thanks Obama.

You going to be okay?

[misko27]

To be fair this is America, we get nervous when Presidents start talking about WMD's in vague terms.

Sure, but Presidents have issued whiny signing statements since Reagan* to communicate how they'll (not) enforce the law. They're just another part of the DC noise; they're not legally binding or anything.

*EDIT: Before someone hurries to correct me straight from Wikipedia, the first signing statement was issued by Monroe. Reagan was just the first to make them about the constitutionality of the law as a routine thing.

That's quite clearly untrue. The fact that every single president since 1973 has stated that the War Powers Act is an unconstitutional encroachment on their powers is not "nothing" nor is it DC noise or anything like that, it's basically saying laying the case for a future Supreme Court case. It's a fault-line for a constituational crisis, with every president saying "I don't want to push this issue, but I could."

No it's not trivial when the president says they won't enforce the law.

US stock markets suffer worst week in a decade.

Yes, first bear market in a decade. Trump's fixation with the stock market is about to enter a rough period.

Oh yeah, and the Shutdown is as of this moment guaranteed to occur at midnight, so weeee.

[Trekkin]

it's basically saying laying the case for a future Supreme Court case. It's a fault-line for a constituational crisis, with every president saying "I don't want to push this issue, but I could."

And if the signing statement itself would have any legal weight in that case (beyond, theoretically, something to do with corrupt intent), I'd agree with you, but the fact of the matter is that it's not any sort of legal document or anything binding on anyone.

Now, I should make it clear that I agree with you on the larger separation of powers issue at play here as regards executive latitude in interpreting the law as a matter of implementing it. That's absolutely going to cause a constitutional crisis one day. It's just that signing statements are symptomatic rather than causal, especially now that they've become almost de rigeur. Everything the President could do to cause a crisis could be done as easily with a statement outlining the legal arguments as without one.

[smjjames]

So...

Today, I have signed into law H.R. 7213, the “Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of 2018” (the “Act”).  The Act redesignates the Department of Homeland Security’s Domestic Nuclear Detection Office as the Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office (CWMD Office).  The CWMD Office will coordinate with other Federal efforts and develop a strategy and policy to plan for, detect, and protect against unauthorized chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear materials or devices in the United States.

The Act, however, raises constitutional concerns.

Section 2(a)(10) of the Act purports to require the Assistant Secretary for the CWMD Office, a position created by the Act, to consult with certain congressional committees before making any changes in the structure or requirements of the “Securing the Cities” program.  My Administration will treat this provision as advisory.  I hope that consultation will be possible, and I recognize the benefits of working with the Congress on the “Securing the Cities” program.  Nevertheless, the Act’s mandatory consultation provision is not consistent with the Constitution’s separation of powers.

Section 2(g)(6) of the Act purports to require the Secretary of Homeland Security annually to provide a report to the Congress that includes recommendations for any necessary statutory changes regarding the CWMD Office, or, if no statutory changes are deemed necessary, an explanation of that conclusion.  My Administration will treat this provision in a manner consistent with Article II, section 3 of the Constitution, which provides the President the discretion to recommend to the Congress only “such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.”

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 21, 2018.

Can't decide if this is a nothingburger (first paragraph's "rename That Thing to This Thing" thing) or if there's something quite disturbingly under-the-radar (the bit about the Securing The Cities program and apparent Constitutional concerns). Not familiar enough with the language and background, etc.


But it's not a statement by the President. That much is obvious.

Well yeah, it's not dumbed down enough.

[misko27]

A merry shutdown to all!

[Rowanas]

I really can't say how glad I am that no matter how awful things get in our parliament, Britain never worries about the government not agreeing to pay for shit as basic as wages and the like.  If everyone hated everyone else in both houses, the civil servants of Britain would continue to work and not be forced to take mandatory leaves.

[Hanslanda]

I'm on WIC, we might not get our baby stuff for the month if things get shut down.

Thanks Obama.

Same. *quietly gathers up some torches and pitchforks*