Trump may be able to build wall, Harvard analysts say, but then the ripples will widen – Harvard Gazette

What started as a touchpoint for presidential candidate Donald Trump to visualize immigration concerns has become the linchpin behind a government shutdown and a possible legal challenge to sweeping presidential power.

In calling for Congress to appropriate $5.6 billion to build a wall along the Mexican border to stanch what he called a “growing humanitarian and security crisis” of illegal migrants and smuggled drugs, President Trump declined to sign budget legislation after the 113th Congress rejected his full request last month. That prompted the shutdown, which will soon be the longest in U.S. history.

To complete the border wall, if lawmakers do not capitulate, Trump has threatened to declare a national emergency to circumvent congressional opposition and gain access to Defense Department funds. Though the legality of such a move is in dispute, in the short term such a declaration could give the president vast additional authority to seize private property, redirect federal funds, and order the military to work on border projects.

To understand the breadth of the issues involved and where the stalemate may lead, the Gazette spoke with Harvard faculty members Juliette Kayyem, Mark Tushnet, Alan Bersin, and Elaine Kamarck. Here are their thoughts.

Belfer Lecturer in International Security at Harvard Kennedy School (HKS)
Former assistant secretary for intergovernmental affairs at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) during the Obama administration; and a strategic-security consultant and analyst

A “disturbing move,” but no threat to government

Historically, the invocation of an emergency would be done during a moment of real crisis, say a terror attack or hurricane or pandemic, and would unleash certain authorities, in particular the distribution of money — but also more draconian things like the taking of property or the limitations of people’s ability to move during a quarantine situation. Such declarations have been checked historically, mostly by norms that leaders would not abuse this power and, if they did abuse it, by the courts. My sense is that the president now is looking to use emergency powers at a time when there’s not an emergency, and therefore the administration is heading down the road of essentially lying about the nature of the crisis at the border, the rapes and looting, and the hostage-taking of women — everything he mentioned [in his televised address] — because it doesn’t have the numbers to justify emergency action.

While I think that such a declaration would be disturbing and norm-busting, as well as a sign that the president has essentially pushed himself into a [political] corner, I am not of the school that, if he invokes it, we would be heading toward totalitarianism, mostly because there would be litigation. It wasn’t even clear what he would do with those emergency authorities. So, while disturbing, it’s for me disturbing in the political context more than anything else.

Gauging problems, emergencies, and crises

In crisis management, there are three different categories. One is the problem itself: “Inner city schools aren’t working,” or “too many people don’t have access to health care.” These are problems in the sense that public policy either has gaps or is not working as effectively as it should. The second involves an emergency. That is defined as a disruption that impacts your standard operating procedure, but that is anticipated or you could predict, such as a fire or even a cyberattack. Presumably, you’ve put in place systems that would attack that sort of disruption. Emergencies are short-term. A crisis is an event that so undermines or destabilizes the capacity for an institution to address it that you have to reinvent the reaction and what the institution will do. As someone who has worked on border enforcement, we’ve always had the challenge of undocumented immigrants coming across. We have the benefit that fewer are coming across the border right now, and we have the challenges of a humanitarian crisis because more families are coming now. But none of those things are unanticipated, and those things can be addressed through the democratic process that we have now — which is either change your policy or change your laws.

The border balance between security and flow

Two things you have to remember with border and immigration issues: The first is, the U.S. is a magnet for a lot of complex reasons that have almost nothing to do with our immigration policies. The second is, as I teach in my homeland security course, while we have to focus on security, the challenge for American border enforcement is naturally to focus on what I call the “secure flow” of people, goods, ideas, and networks. We want borders that are moving, in a figurative sense, that millions of people are crossing, where commerce is vibrant and lucrative, all the things that make this country about movement. So while, yes, there’s always something else you can do, a perfect border is not the goal. It is some balance between security and flow, which is always going to be a work in progress, depending on what the threat is. The bigger threat now is not terrorism, it’s cybersecurity.

William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law
Harvard Law School

Courts would allow leeway, but then there’s the public

If we think about what the courts would say if the president declared an emergency, the answer would be that the courts will give the president a great deal of discretion and leeway in his evaluation of whether there is an emergency. That’s different from asking whether, as a fundamental constitutional matter, there are standards for determining whether there’s an emergency and, in particular, whether a president can declare an emergency without having substantial reasons for characterizing the situation as requiring immediate, urgent attention. The courts will enforce this standard. As a matter of fundamental constitutional principle, the president has to offer reasons to the public explaining why this is something that requires urgent attention. He would have a decent case defending [an emergency] declaration in court. He clearly has more difficulty defending it before the public — and the latter is constitutionally relevant.

Property owners — but few others — likely have legal standing

The most obvious thing is if he starts to build the wall, he’ll need to seize some property along the Texas border, so the property owner would have [legal] standing. But the question of standing of the House [of Representatives] as an institution, or as a member of the House, is very difficult, and the law leans against [such] standing. That doesn’t mean you couldn’t find a judge who would allow it. Standing would arise when something is done in connection with the declaration.

If the wall can be justified militarily, its legality may follow

There appears to be authorization from Congress, which makes it the Youngstown “category 1” in which the president has all his inherent power and whatever power Congress has given to him. So there does appear to be delegation here. And there’s the delegation that says you can spend appropriated money for military purposes. So, if this is found to be not a military purpose, then maybe Congress has prohibited spending the money, and he can’t do it. But that turns on whether  the purposes are fairly described as military. We had a discussion about this yesterday at the Law School. I think a court would find that the purposes are military. Most of my colleagues thought that the wall would not be fairly described as military.

Supreme Court likely on sidelines unless wall halted

If a declaration was made and you find somebody who has standing, obviously, the lower courts have to weigh in. The key point is that it’s fundamentally a question of statutory interpretation. There’s nothing fancy or constitutional about it. But whether the U.S. Supreme Court would participate will depend on what happens in the lower courts. If the lower courts blocked construction [of the wall], I think the Supreme Court would be interested in the case. If the lower courts allow it to go ahead, I don’t think the Supreme Court would take it up. I don’t think there are deep, fundamental constitutional issues at stake. The issue is whether the president has properly exercised the power delegated to him by Congress, and that’s straightforward.

Senior fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at HKS
Assistant secretary for policy and international affairs and chief diplomatic officer at DHS from 2012 to 2015; vice president of INTERPOL for the Americas region; and commissioner of U.S. customs and border protection from 2010 to 2012

Even with a declaration, a wall may not follow

I think the likely outcome here is if, in another few days, he declares a national emergency — which he has the right to do — the matter is then thrown into the courts before any significant amount of money is spent on the wall out of the Defense Department. By the time the courts resolve it in three, four, or five months from now, he’ll likely be on to something else. I think that’s the way this turns out. I don’t think a wall is going to be built. I think both the weight of the policy arguments as well as of public opinion will keep it from being built. I don’t think the president made his case before his Tuesday night televised speech, and he certainly didn’t do anything then that would swing people to his point of view who weren’t already sharing it.

Customs and border protection won’t see direct benefit

A declaration wouldn’t directly help in terms of providing the elements of border support and security that DHS, that the professionals want, which is additional technology, repair and maintenance of the barrier infrastructure that exists. And some would argue for more border patrol agents, although I think others would disagree with that. The national emergency would permit the president to issue an order to the Defense Department — at least in his mind it would — to begin to build the border wall that Congress has denied him. At that point, Congress could challenge that in court, and the court would decide whether or not, in the context of this national emergency, whether the president has the authority unilaterally to build something that could not be obtained through ordinary legislative process. There’s nothing that immediately happens that would benefit customs and border protection.

A broken system when it comes to asylum

Our immigration system is broken, and the asylum system is perhaps most broken. The hole through which migrants are coming is the asylum system. It’s not the easiest, but there’s a loophole. People can come to the border, claim asylum, and then they are paroled into the country, waiting for an immigration hearing that, because of the backlog of the system, is two, three, or five years off. The problem today is the inability of the asylum system to efficiently and effectively process petitioners because of the backlog in the immigration court. This is not a security problem; this is a policy and administrative problem that needs to be addressed. And yet the president shuts down the government, and part of the government now on furlough and not working is the immigration court. Immigration judges are precisely the people who we need processing these cases. The reason the system is broken is that 75‒80 percent [of those screened] are paroled into the country — 75 percent of those who actually go through a full hearing are denied asylum. So, in effect, they’re in the country legally, but they’ve entered with a claim of asylum that was not sustained once it’s heard.

It’s a policy failure, and in no case does a wall address the underlying issues. The president is not wrong with regard to the flow of drugs. But the vast majority of drugs entering this country illegally come through the ports of entry, not between the ports of entry, so a wall would have nothing to do with stopping that.

The big issue of those overstaying visas

We could devote more to interior enforcement, and that has not been a priority. It’s much more intensive. We’re a country of 330 million people, so finding people [who have overstayed visas] is not easy. It could be done, but it would take a vastly increased immigration customs enforcement force than we have now, and it has other priorities having to do with border enforcement and a whole array of criminal offenses.

Tackling the forces that prompt refugees to head north

This is a big problem. There’s no question that the forces pushing people out of the Northern Triangle (Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador) — violence, poverty, the desire for family reunification — all of those are push factors that have to be addressed if we want to deal long-term with the causes of irregular migration. But that takes a generation. The Obama administration started with a $750 million effort, and the new regime in Mexico of Andrés Manuel López Obrador is calling for a Marshall Plan in Central America. All of that is correct, but such programs take a generation to achieve and will not address, in the short term or midterm, the issues that we face.

Lecturer in public policy at HKS who teaches a course on the evolution of the 21st-century presidency
Author of “Why Presidents Fail and How They Can Succeed Again”

How we got to this standoff over the border

It’s Trump’s own inexperience and his inability to learn that’s really the failure here. There was a big program called SBInet that built barriers and sensors and all sorts of things. SBInet was a failure; it died a quiet death in the Obama administration, but with Republican support. It wasn’t like Obama killed it. And the reason was that it was just simply not working very well. So we have experience with a wall, and it’s got really limited capacity.

It’s not that people are against border security, including Democrats. It’s that nobody thinks this is a very good idea, and we’ve tried it before. One of the points that I make in my book is how presidents usually fail when they fail to understand what’s going on in the federal government that they’re in charge of. So, if he was more attuned to the details of policy, he would’ve probably backed off from that, built some more barriers, but asked for $5 billion to do a tracking system for people who come into the U.S. and overstay their visas, which is the real source of illegal immigration. A wall doesn’t even remotely begin to solve that. A typical president would’ve found a way out of the box he painted himself into long ago, declared victory, and gotten something out of the Republican Congress when he had a House and Senate. I can’t stress enough how unusual this guy is, and how out of the norm this presidency has been. 

Unless courts back emergency, declaration “would not stand”

It is commonly understood that grants of presidential authority are for real emergencies. The analogy is, of course, the limitations of the War Powers Act. We let presidents go to war because if we were attacked, or there’s something important going on, you can’t wait for Congress to get together and debate it. We do it, and the test has always been a common-sense test. I think when the courts look at this, they’re going to ask: Is this an actual emergency, or is this an assertion of presidential power that goes beyond what was anticipated in the statute? My guess is that they would come down on that.

For example, presidents cannot, via executive order, contradict a vote of Congress. So you cannot use an executive order on something that Congress has already told you you can’t do. Congress has already told him in no uncertain terms, because it passed a bunch of budgets, that it’s not spending this kind of money on his wall. The Republican Congress has told him that, and now a Democratic House is telling him that. It would be an expansion of power beyond what I think was contemplated in the statute to actually be able to contradict Congress by using this emergency power. I can’t see that it would stand in court.

If upheld, the declaration expands presidential power

The only way it affects future presidents is if he gets away with it. If he gets away with it, it would be a big expansion of presidential authority.

The responses were edited for clarity and length.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


Privacy Policy

WideBitcoin.com is committed to safeguarding your privacy. Contact us at if you have any questions or problems regarding the use of your Personal Data and we will gladly assist you.

By using this site or/and our services, you consent to the Processing of your Personal Data as described in this Privacy Policy.

Table of Contents

  1. Definitions used in this Policy
  2. Data protection principles we follow
  3. What rights do you have regarding your Personal Data
  4. What Personal Data we gather about you
  5. How we use your Personal Data
  6. Who else has access to your Personal Data
  7. How we secure your data
  8. Information about cookies
  9. Contact information

Definitions

Personal Data – any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person.
Processing – any operation or set of operations which is performed on Personal Data or on sets of Personal Data.
Data subject – a natural person whose Personal Data is being Processed.
Child – a natural person under 16 years of age.
We/us (either capitalized or not)

Data Protection Principles

We promise to follow the following data protection principles:

  • Processing is lawful, fair, transparent. Our Processing activities have lawful grounds. We always consider your rights before Processing Personal Data. We will provide you information regarding Processing upon request.
  • Processing is limited to the purpose. Our Processing activities fit the purpose for which Personal Data was gathered.
  • Processing is done with minimal data. We only gather and Process the minimal amount of Personal Data required for any purpose.
  • Processing is limited with a time period. We will not store your personal data for longer than needed.
  • We will do our best to ensure the accuracy of data.
  • We will do our best to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of data.

Data Subject’s rights

The Data Subject has the following rights:

  1. Right to information – meaning you have to right to know whether your Personal Data is being processed; what data is gathered, from where it is obtained and why and by whom it is processed.
  2. Right to access – meaning you have the right to access the data collected from/about you. This includes your right to request and obtain a copy of your Personal Data gathered.
  3. Right to rectification – meaning you have the right to request rectification or erasure of your Personal Data that is inaccurate or incomplete.
  4. Right to erasure – meaning in certain circumstances you can request for your Personal Data to be erased from our records.
  5. Right to restrict processing – meaning where certain conditions apply, you have the right to restrict the Processing of your Personal Data.
  6. Right to object to processing – meaning in certain cases you have the right to object to Processing of your Personal Data, for example in the case of direct marketing.
  7. Right to object to automated Processing – meaning you have the right to object to automated Processing, including profiling; and not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated Processing. This right you can exercise whenever there is an outcome of the profiling that produces legal effects concerning or significantly affecting you.
  8. Right to data portability – you have the right to obtain your Personal Data in a machine-readable format or if it is feasible, as a direct transfer from one Processor to another.
  9. Right to lodge a complaint – in the event that we refuse your request under the Rights of Access, we will provide you with a reason as to why. If you are not satisfied with the way your request has been handled please contact us.
  10. Right for the help of supervisory authority – meaning you have the right for the help of a supervisory authority and the right for other legal remedies such as claiming damages.
  11. Right to withdraw consent – you have the right withdraw any given consent for Processing of your Personal Data.

Data we gather

Information you have provided us with
This might be your e-mail address, name, billing address, home address etc – mainly information that is necessary for delivering you a product/service or to enhance your customer experience with us. We save the information you provide us with in order for you to comment or perform other activities on the website. This information includes, for example, your name and e-mail address.

Information automatically collected about you
This includes information that is automatically stored by cookies and other session tools. For example, your shopping cart information, your IP address, your shopping history (if there is any) etc. This information is used to improve your customer experience. When you use our services or look at the contents of our website, your activities may be logged.

Information from our partners
We gather information from our trusted partners with confirmation that they have legal grounds to share that information with us. This is either information you have provided them directly with or that they have gathered about you on other legal grounds. See the list of our partners here.

Publicly available information
We might gather information about you that is publicly available.

How we use your Personal Data

We use your Personal Data in order to:

  • provide our service to you. This includes for example registering your account; providing you with other products and services that you have requested; providing you with promotional items at your request and communicating with you in relation to those products and services; communicating and interacting with you; and notifying you of changes to any services.
  • enhance your customer experience;
  • fulfil an obligation under law or contract;

We use your Personal Data on legitimate grounds and/or with your Consent.

On the grounds of entering into a contract or fulfilling contractual obligations, we Process your Personal Data for the following purposes:

  • to identify you;
  • to provide you a service or to send/offer you a product;
  • to communicate either for sales or invoicing;

On the ground of legitimate interest, we Process your Personal Data for the following purposes:

  • to send you personalized offers* (from us and/or our carefully selected partners);
  • to administer and analyse our client base (purchasing behaviour and history) in order to improve the quality, variety, and availability of products/ services offered/provided;
  • to conduct questionnaires concerning client satisfaction;

As long as you have not informed us otherwise, we consider offering you products/services that are similar or same to your purchasing history/browsing behaviour to be our legitimate interest.

With your consent we Process your Personal Data for the following purposes:

  • to send you newsletters and campaign offers (from us and/or our carefully selected partners);
  • for other purposes we have asked your consent for;

We Process your Personal Data in order to fulfil obligation rising from law and/or use your Personal Data for options provided by law. We reserve the right to anonymise Personal Data gathered and to use any such data. We will use data outside the scope of this Policy only when it is anonymised. We save your billing information and other information gathered about you for as long as needed for accounting purposes or other obligations deriving from law, but not longer than 1 year.

We might process your Personal Data for additional purposes that are not mentioned here, but are compatible with the original purpose for which the data was gathered. To do this, we will ensure that:

  • the link between purposes, context and nature of Personal Data is suitable for further Processing;
  • the further Processing would not harm your interests and
  • there would be appropriate safeguard for Processing.

We will inform you of any further Processing and purposes.

Who else can access your Personal Data

We do not share your Personal Data with strangers. Personal Data about you is in some cases provided to our trusted partners in order to either make providing the service to you possible or to enhance your customer experience. We share your data with:

Our processing partners:

  • facebook.com
  • google.com
  • bing.com
  • twitter.com
  • pinterest.com

Our business partners:

  • facebook.com
  • google.com
  • bing.com
  • twitter.com
  • pinterest.com

Connected third parties:

  • facebook.com
  • google.com
  • bing.com
  • twitter.com
  • pinterest.com

We only work with Processing partners who are able to ensure adequate level of protection to your Personal Data. We disclose your Personal Data to third parties or public officials when we are legally obliged to do so. We might disclose your Personal Data to third parties if you have consented to it or if there are other legal grounds for it.

How we secure your data

We do our best to keep your Personal Data safe. We use safe protocols for communication and transferring data (such as HTTPS). We use anonymising and pseudonymising where suitable. We monitor our systems for possible vulnerabilities and attacks.

Even though we try our best we can not guarantee the security of information. However, we promise to notify suitable authorities of data breaches. We will also notify you if there is a threat to your rights or interests. We will do everything we reasonably can to prevent security breaches and to assist authorities should any breaches occur.

If you have an account with us, note that you have to keep your username and password secret.

Children

We do not intend to collect or knowingly collect information from children. We do not target children with our services.

Cookies and other technologies we use

We use cookies and/or similar technologies to analyse customer behaviour, administer the website, track users’ movements, and to collect information about users. This is done in order to personalize and enhance your experience with us.

A cookie is a tiny text file stored on your computer. Cookies store information that is used to help make sites work. Only we can access the cookies created by our website. You can control your cookies at the browser level. Choosing to disable cookies may hinder your use of certain functions.

We use cookies for the following purposes:

  • Necessary cookies – these cookies are required for you to be able to use some important features on our website, such as logging in. These cookies don’t collect any personal information.
  • Functionality cookies – these cookies provide functionality that makes using our service more convenient and makes providing more personalised features possible. For example, they might remember your name and e-mail in comment forms so you don’t have to re-enter this information next time when commenting.
  • Analytics cookies – these cookies are used to track the use and performance of our website and services
  • Advertising cookies – these cookies are used to deliver advertisements that are relevant to you and to your interests. In addition, they are used to limit the number of times you see an advertisement. They are usually placed to the website by advertising networks with the website operator’s permission. These cookies remember that you have visited a website and this information is shared with other organisations such as advertisers. Often targeting or advertising cookies will be linked to site functionality provided by the other organisation.

You can remove cookies stored in your computer via your browser settings. Alternatively, you can control some 3rd party cookies by using a privacy enhancement platform such as optout.aboutads.info or youronlinechoices.com. For more information about cookies, visit allaboutcookies.org.

We use Google Analytics to measure traffic on our website. Google has their own Privacy Policy which you can review here. If you’d like to opt out of tracking by Google Analytics, visit the Google Analytics opt-out page.

Read more about cookies on our Cookie Policy

Contact Information

email: [email protected]

Changes to this Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to make change to this Privacy Policy.

You can configure your Internet browser, by changing its options, to stop accepting cookies completely or to prompt you before accepting a cookie from the website you visit. If you do not accept cookies, however, you may not be able to use all portions of the WideBitcoin Websites or all functionality of the Services.

Please note that disabling these technologies may interfere with the performance and features of the Services.

You may also disable cookies on the WideBitcoin Sites by modifying your settings here:

Visitor comments may be checked through an automated spam detection service.

Last Update: May 25, 2018