VETO! Republicans have voted away Trump's national state of emergency. What now? Quartz

0
4

The Republican-controlled US Senate has just joined the House of Representatives to block Donald Trump's emergency declaration to fund a wall on the American border with money seized by the Pentagon.

The senate voted from 59 to 41 for a law declaring the emergency declaration unconstitutional, weeks after the democratically controlled house had approved a similar motion for a vote of 245 to 182 votes. The situation is the Senate's rare reprimand for Trump: majority leader Mitch McConnell has largely managed to keep the bills off the ground, which could force Republicans to vote in a way that could be considered unfaithful to the president.

Who voted against Trump

Every Democrat in the Senate voted to block Trump's statement, with most of them saying that the president's attempt to use emergency powers to allocate funds that he had not budgeted was unconstitutional. They were accompanied by 12 Republican senators, more than expected, many of whom stated the same argument:

Lamar Alexander, Tennessee, who told voters that he was worried that future presidents would abuse power.

Roy Blunt, Missouri, who voted in accordance with most Trump positions in the last Congressional session, but said he was afraid that the Democrats could use an emergency statement to take over arms control.

Susan Collins, Maine, who crossed over to Trump on health care, but supported his candidate Supreme Court Brett Kavanaugh. She said she would block Trump's statement weeks ago.

Mike Lee, Utah, who previously co-sponsored a bill to prevent the president from running on this issue, limiting the president's powers to declare emergency declarations in the future. (The house wouldn't take it.)

Jerry MoranKansas, who shared three pages of handwritten reasons to vote to block Trump's emergency declaration on Twitter, including unconstitutionality and not wanting to give Trump powers, he would not have allowed President Obama.

Lisa Murkowski, Alaska, who has often voted against Trump-backed bills, and said that Trump's statement "goes around the express intention of Congress about issues within its jurisdiction."

Rand Paul, Kentucky, who said he failed to give Trump "extra-constitutional powers," that is, those who are not in the constitution.

Rob Portman Ohio, the other co-sponsor of the failed bill to prevent a confrontation with Trump on the issue.

Mitt Romney, Utah, who said he had a "vote for the Constitution and for the balance of powers that forms the core."

Marco Rubio, Florida, who said he "cannot vouch for moving funds that Congress has explicitly appropriated for the construction and upgrades of our military bases."

tap Toomey Pennsylvania, who said he supports what the president is trying to do, but not & # 39; as the president approaches & # 39 ;.

Roger Wicker, Mississippi, who said that the Trump statement "would allow a future liberal president to declare emergencies to carry out arms control or to tackle" climate situations "or even take down the wall we are building today break."

Self-defined "constitutionalists" in particular Ted Cruz from Texas and Ben Sasse van Nebraska did not vote to block Trump.

Trump's first presidential veto

The bill goes to the White House, where Trump has previously said he will veto it, making it the first time he has refused to sign a bill that is being adopted by both parties to Congress.

The White House secretary, Sarah Huckabee, said Thursday afternoon that she wasn't sure when that would happen, but within 20 minutes of the Senate vote, Trump had indicated that he had not changed his mind:

Veto transfers are rare

Trump's veto sends the bill back to Congress. To permanently block Trump's emergency statement, two-thirds of the members of both chambers of Congress must vote to replace the veto, or 290 members of the House (there are currently 235) and 67 members of the Senate.

In this case, Parliament will have to take an additional 45 Republican votes and the Senate to veto the law, which is politically unlikely because it would mean a large number of elected politicians in states that Trump won in 2016. on the president.

Ignoring a presidential veto has only happened 111 times in American history, as congressional reporter Chad Pergram notes:

Apart from that, there are several lawsuits that dispute the statement. Ultimately, the problem is likely to end before the Supreme Court, where it will serve as a litmus test for judges.