The Government Shutdown Isn't Stopping Trump From Amassing 'Emergency' Powers
As of mid-2025, there were roughly 50 simultaneous national emergencies in force.
Usually when we're in the midst of a government shutdown, I'm in a good mood. Sure, recent shutdowns haven't accomplished much in terms of shrinking the cost or scope of the federal government in the long run, but it's nice to walk around feeling a little less governed than usual.
But even that small pleasure has turned sour. Yes, fiscal restraint matters. It matters to this magazine, which has made cutting spending the subject of a greater percentage of our cover stories than perhaps any other publication. And it matters to me personally; I've spent the last 25 years writing about the need to take debt and spending seriously. The size of the state is inversely proportional to personal liberty in ways that are too often overlooked.
But the intense acceleration of the quest to aggregate power in the White House is now unambiguously the more immediate threat to liberty. It's visible every day on my commute to work, as National Guardsmen linger in my D.C. Metro stop. It's visible in the September gathering of the nation's top military officials for something between a pep rally and a company retreat. It's visible everywhere Immigration and Customs Enforcement is staging raids and setting up warrantless checkpoints. It's visible in the administration's moves to take a stake in Intel and broker a TikTok sale. It's visible from space. (As I write this, Blue Origin is completing its 36th New Shepard flight—a bright spot in a dark month.)
The Cato Institute's Gene Healy wrote the bible on the imperial presidency, tracing how voters of all stripes invest outsized hopes in presidents and then act shocked when presidents behave like tyrants. The durable lesson: Don't confer powers on your team's guy that you wouldn't trust in the other team's hands.
But it's hard to break the habit of agglomerating authority when your party is in charge. This problem is cross-partisan and is older than Donald Trump—or Joe Biden, or even Richard Nixon. After Watergate, the nation briefly remembered why limits are good. But it wasn't long before the White House started soaking up power again, and by the 2000s a cadre of executive-power enthusiasts, such as Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, started pushing hard to "restore" presidential prerogatives. The legal and scholarly scaffolding for today's power grabs was assembled well before the last few months.
Meanwhile, the "national security" and "federal property protection" exceptions have become a tunnel wide enough to drive an armored personnel carrier through. In 2020, the Department of Homeland Security surged hundreds of federal officers into Portland, Oregon, with threadbare training for the job at hand; internal reviews later read like warnings from the future we're now experiencing. Surveillance of protesters and mission creep were inevitable; they were the most predictable features of an overgrown executive. But despite that mess, the boots just keep hitting the ground. Portland is once more bracing for a federalized deployment—this time National Guard troops—with state and local officials fighting back on the grounds of both necessity and legality.
Immigration enforcement shows how this logic lands in daily life. The federal government claims sweeping authority within a 100-mile border zone that covers where nearly two-thirds of Americans live. That zone has long been a gray area for warrantless stops and checkpoints, ripe for masked agents far from any actual border to nick away at ordinary civil liberties. Powers granted today will be used more aggressively tomorrow. And powers used in that 100-mile border zone will soon be used elsewhere.
The emergency is now the default. Most of the knobs and levers a modern president uses to bully companies, police speech, or move bodies around aren't new laws—they're standby powers that switch on with a magic word: emergency. Congress littered the U.S. Code with these shortcuts; the Brennan Center for Justice has cataloged 137 statutory powers that spring to life the moment a president declares one. (Many never fully turn off.) As of mid-2025, there were roughly 50 simultaneous national emergencies still in force; they are renewed annually, spanning everything from sanctions to tariffs. That architecture lets the White House reach for trade controls, financial blockades, and tech blacklists without returning to Congress. If you like your powers separated, this is the opposite.
I still want Congress to do its job on spending: legislate clearly, spend less, and claw back delegations it never should've handed over to the executive branch. The remedy isn't complicated, but it is hard to execute. Congress must take back its rightful powers, narrow emergency authorities, sunset delegations, and relearn the civic discipline of saying "no" to our own would-be redeemers, even when they're on our own team. Kudos to a few senators, Rand Paul (R–Ky.) among them, who in early October tried to take back the power to declare war after the Trump administration made several unauthorized strikes on alleged Venezuelan drug smugglers. (Alas, the vote failed 48 to 51.)
I still like the idea of a shutdown from time to time, to slow the bureaucracy and remind people that daily life goes on without a fully operational government. But I won't trade constitutional constraints for the promise of a quick policy win administered from the Resolute Desk.
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "How To Ruin a Shutdown."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Demon-Craps did shit first and did shit worst, so shit is OK, even SPLENDID, when RePoopLicKKKunts do shit, too!
All hail Orange Caesar.
AND also ALL HAIL the Orange Caesar's VEEP, Hill-Billy Caligula, too!!! And let us snot neglect Ron DeSatan!
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⢀⠀⠀⢀⡴⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣆⠀⠀⢀⣸⡏⠀⠀⠀⠰⡄⠀⠀
⠈⠉⠋⠀⠈⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠋⠀⠰⡏⠀⠀⠀⣸⠀⢀⠇⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⢀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⢆⠀⢀⡽⠀⠀⠸⣅⠀⢇⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⢠⠏⠀⠀⠀⢠⢥⠀⠈⠐⠘⡆⠀⠀⠀⣸⠆⠀⠃⠀⡀
⠀⠀⠘⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⢀⡤⠊⠘⢄⣀⠀⠀⠃⠀⠀⢞⠀⠀⠀⠀⠁⠁
⠀⠀⠐⠀⠀⠁⠀⠀⡏⡀⠀⠘⠡⠤⠽⡲⢤⡀⠀⠈⢱⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⠷⣄⡀⠒⠀⠀⢀⡡⡈⠽⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⢫⣀⢪⠀⠀⠉⠀⠤⠀⠀⠥⡖⢥⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡽⠟⠘⠘⠀⢀⡀⠀⠊⠀⠀⠀⠘⠄⣌⢳⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⢀⡞⠕⠂⠂⠄⠀⠠⠅⣁⣀⣀⣀⣀⣢⣌⡴⠿⠚⢳⡄⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⢸⠑⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠐⠔⠀⠀⡄⡀⠀⠄⡈⣠⢹⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠘⣆⠛⠆⠠⠀⠀⠄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠛⠀⠃⡁⣅⠘⠷⢋⡼⡀⡠⠀
⠀⠀⢎⠫⢳⣽⣠⣈⠆⠀⠀⠀⠠⠤⠠⠐⣀⣀⣠⡴⢞⢋⢊⠌⡰⠁
⠀⠈⠁⠊⠀⠐⠩⠋⠝⠹⠉⠛⠙⠉⠋⠍⠉⠋⠊⠀⠑⠑⠁⠈⠀⠀
You’ll get used to it.
True
Your choice is Orange Caesar or a faceless cabal puppeting your 'elected' officials and 'managed democracy'- I'll take Orange Caesar.
At least its honest.
I reject both since I have no choice anyway.
Simple fix. Congress can change the law.
Now I know reason has taken a hard turn into judicial supremacy and all, but congress can change it. Even with most of the laws they can do a simple vote to stop the emergency declaration.
Isn't thst reasons entire stance? Ask congress?
Simple fix. Congress can change the law....Isn't thst reasons entire stance? Ask congress?
Uhhh, yeah. That's probably why she said, "I still want Congress to do its job on spending: legislate clearly, spend less, and claw back delegations it never should've handed over to the executive branch. The remedy isn't complicated, but it is hard to execute. Congress must take back its rightful powers, narrow emergency authorities, sunset delegations, and relearn the civic discipline of saying "no" to our own would-be redeemers, even when they're on our own team."
At this point I believe that Jesse literally cannot see anything that contradicts the narrative in his head. He looks at what you quoted, and to him it's just letters swimming around.
Just so. I will say that she obviously tacked that on at the end, and it is way more of a CYA than the crux of the article. I will also admit that I don't finish a lot of the articles I start, particularly when I find them ponderous. But claiming something wasn't in the article when it clearly was is pretty typical of the comments section.
You fell for one of Mike's dishonest tricks. I never made a comment regarding the author. But Mike had to switch his response as if I had.
Hes a piece of shit like that.
But her style is typical of modern day journalist writings. There is a meme regarding the NYT that if you want to learn the facts of the story read it bottom up. The same behaviors many reason authors use.
You fell for one of Mike's dishonest tricks
You think we're all as stupid as you are?
Being that he actually believes he’s smart, yes.
“She said something that contradicts all the shit we talk about her. That means she didn’t really mean it. There. The narrative is safe.”
I commonly criticize Trump for being stupid, and also for being fascist. But now he is being stupid about being a fascist, which is just embarrassing. If Trump was smart about being a fascist he would re-open the government absent a spending bill. Totally illegal but he would neutralize the D filibuster and he would be able to cut any program or department he wants.
Liberals like you are tgr most retarded.
Declaring someone a fascist then demanding they act fascist. All while not knowing what fascism means.
No, you misunderstand. They already act like fascists and are fascists. But they are doing it badly. If the US falls into fascism, at least I want us to do fascism better than anyone else. To be destroyed by idiot fascists doing idiotic things should bring shame to everyone.
Sorta like the fascism during the previous administration where people were forced to take a deadly unproven vaxx, forced lockdowns and school closings, forced to wear a stupid useless mask and worst of all people were censored who dared to speak out.
But that's ok because the liberals did it.
You do realize that the overused term, fascist has become totally meaningless now, alongside Nazi and Hitler.
No one cares .
It's exactly like that except with more centralized power in one person, more martial law enforcement and more international relations chaos.
Dems curtailed freedom with dispersed power and social influence (cancel culture and a complicit media). MAGA curtains freedom on the whims of a strongman (but also are adopting cancel culture). Both are authoritarian, but one is decidedly more fascist.
Didn't take long to see someone shouting the usual Trumpian refrain.
We all know it.
They say it every single day.
Because every single day Trump gives a reason to say it.
C'mon.
All together.
"Democrats did it first and you didn't complain you hypocrite! That means you can't criticize him and makes whatever he does ok!"
Hilarious.
And exactly just how are they acting like fascists, Molly? Or are you using the term since it makes it then OK to hate and possibly eliminate them?
Strange that a stupid fascist like yourself doesn’t know what either is. Seeing that we are doing definitions here, can you help with:
What is a fair wage?
What is a woman?
I know. A fair wage is what you make if you are not a woman. In other words - if you feel like underpaid you are a woman.
I commonly criticize Tony for being retarded, and also for being a raving faggot. But now he is being retarded about being a raving faggot, which is just pathetic and embarrassing.
LMAO... I knew at the heart of the matter you leftards thought cutting the [Na]tional So[zi]alist Empire was fascist.
Thanks for clarifying that with blatant words.
"If Trump was smart about being a fascist" ... "cut any program or department"
CUTTING/LIMITING [OUR] GOVERNMENT IS FASCIST!!! /s
I'm glad the ICE remains on the job doing what they didn't do during the Obiden administration. During sleepy Joe's watch the only people arrested were those who peacefully protested a rigged election.
The Obiden administration made the Nixon version seem tame. People boasted about being on Nixon's enemies list but at least they weren't railroaded into a filthy prison for four years and treated as if they were in a communist gulag.
It's nice to know ICE remains on the job.
But Dad, Congress said I can do it!
- Teenager's lame excuse
An excuse that often works before the courts if Congress did in fact say that.
But even that small pleasure has turned sour. Yes, fiscal restraint matters. It matters to this magazine…
Daddy Warbucks cut back the subsidies to the magazine? Y’all had been getting USAID money or something?
It's visible every day on my commute to work, as National Guardsmen linger in my D.C. Metro stop.
It isn’t your stop, it is the stop closest to you. And barely over half of the operating costs come from fares with the remaining coming from DC, MD, and VA taxpayers. How libertarian being subsidized by others. Capital projects are reportedly getting done only when additional coerced taxpayer money is used.
I have yet to see fiscal restraint matter to this magazine. They had a half dozen articles against the BBB despite admitting 1.5t over 10 in cuts because it extended tax cuts. I watched the raise against audits under DOGE. I have yet to see them cheer a recissions bill. They've ignored and often defended dems and courts stopping large cuts. They've been on the judges side for firing excess fed workers.
Do you post this absolute shit with a straight face, or are you actually a master-trolling, minor con man?
Sockasmic with the double question.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⡍⠛⠶⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡾⠁⠀⠀⠀⢙⣦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⣀⣀⣀⠴⠚⠁⠈⢷⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣴⠟⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡸⢧⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⠁⠀⢀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠔⠋⢀⡀⠈⢻⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣼⣦⠋⣉⡉⢲⡚⠉⠀⢠⠞⣉⣉⠳⡼⢧⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⢀⡾⠋⠀⡇⢰⣿⣿⠀⣧⠀⠀⡏⢸⣿⣿⡆⢹⠀⠉⢷⡀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀⢧⠈⠿⠟⢠⣇⠤⠖⢳⡈⠻⠟⢁⡞⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀
⢀⣠⠶⠓⠒⠒⠒⠓⢒⡚⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢒⡒⠋⠀⠀⣠⠿⢦⣄⠀
⣾⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠫⣌⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⣩⠟⢀⡤⠚⠁⠀⠀⠙⣆
⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⠒⠒⣒⡲⠭⠒⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡿
⠹⢦⣄⣀⣀⣠⣤⠤⠴⠶⠶⣬⣭⣄⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣤⡤⠶⠋⠀
I've spent the last 25 years writing about the need to take debt and spending seriously.
Say it then, KMW. Say these words:
Cut off the entitlement spigot to the garbage Americans and illegals. Do not give them a single f-ing dime.
If you can't, or won't, then shut your lying hypocrite mouth you stupid fat cow.
Fat cow?
Fat. Cow.
How can you say those things about her:
https://reason.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Katherine-Mangu-Ward-6677-2-1-scaled.jpg
It's pretty easy, actually.
A purple cow? Think that is a Babe the Blue Ox Halloween costume?
Around these parts, "purple cow" is a store-brand of ice cream.
She is fat with leftism.
They say "Never meet your heroes." I don't have many heroes, certainly nobody at Reason. But good God did I not need to see a picture of KMW.
You are welcome.
You’re confusing Quixy.
Yep
I second that with an alley beer drinking “yep”, I tell you what.
As of mid-2025, there were roughly 50 simultaneous national emergencies still in force; they are renewed annually, spanning everything from sanctions to tariffs.
The majority of those flow from our reserve currency status. We are not inherently required to weaponize the dollar and control access to global trade everywhere. But that is precisely the power that reserve status grants. It is precisely the power that the US will lose when (not if) the world de-dollarizes. It is the extra-constitutional power that we now wield and abuse.
De-dollarization is as inevitable as arithmetic (see Triffin's paradox). The domestic consequences of being the reserve currency or continuing in that role are equally arithmetically inevitable - hollowing out of manufacturing and supply chains, financialization of the economy, debt and asset bubbles driving growth, perpetual and increasing trade deficits, etc.
But these emergencies and our role in the world are equally a consequence of that reserve status. If our deep state loses its ability to weaponize the dollar, then it will weaponize something else. It won't go quietly into that good night. It will rage against the dying of the light. Likely nukes since those are the 'cheapest' weapons once we lose our ability to fund/source an overwhelming non-nuclear military that can reach everywhere.
We face the same danger - and threat to humanity - that everyone worried about re the Soviets when their power collapses. Resorting to nukes as their power weakens. But their power was always purely geographical. Our geography is invulnerable to decline. Our power has been economic - and hence near impossible to understand how we will decline. We are even arrogant in our sense of security.
The obvious analogy is Britain. They were the reserve currency before us and faced the identical issue of hollowed out mfg, financialization, debt, and inevitably external threats to that status quo that resulted in overreach and war. The obvious difference is - they were able to hand over the reserve keys peacefully to someone else.
Keynes at Bretton Woods understood that it would be better for an institutional currency to be that reserve. Esp since that sort of institutional currency puts the real power into the shared hands of both the major debtor and major creditor. They're the ones who have the deal with the imbalances of a reserve and back then that meant the UK and US.
We, of course knew better. We weren't going to share that arithmetic power with the UK. We were Gollum. Now we are the debtor. China is the creditor. We are now stuck. And completely nonserious about the problem. China really does understand the problem - and does NOT want to be the reserve currency.
Here endeth the book.
Ok ok short chapter 2.
The speed with which the UK lost its financial ability to finance its 'imperial reach' while keeping its reserve status is very fast. Before WW1 - interest on debt as a % of GDP in the UK was around 2%. Well below its defense spend. By 1915, it was 3%. By 1919, over 6%. By 1926 (when it foolishly thought it could restore a gold standard by creating a global depression), it was nearly 9%. It only dropped below 8% as that depression unfolded and we know now where that led and what economic tensions/consequences that caused.
We are already well into the uncontrollable debt blowout - without a war. With really a very benign global order if that's what we want to bequeath as we transfer that reserve 'ring'. But that's clearly not what we want.
If the US is Gollum, is the UK Isildur or Sauron? I’d guess you pick Isildur then make Sauron Israel. Am I right?
Oh - and if there is a partisan tilt re those emergency powers that makes them difficult to end, it is those based on reserve power.
D presidents don't use emergency powers as much as R's but the ones they do create are overwhelmingly reserve-currency based. And emergency powers based on reserve power are rarely ended. There is an overwhelming awareness that sanctions do not work as a means/substitute for hard power. But an overwhelming bipartisan consensus to keep digging deeper even though we know it doesn't work.
Bush declared 13 national emergencies - 11 (7 still current, 4 ended) reserve power based. 2 (both current) other
Obama declared 12 - 11 (9 current, 2 ended) based on reserve power, 1 (ended) other
Trump has declared 20 emergencies - 9 (8 current) reserve power based, 11 other (9 current 2 ended)
Biden declared 9 emergencies - 8 (7 current) reserve power, 1 other current.
De-dollarization will eliminate the capability for the executive to unilaterally declare 72% of the emergencies they have recently declared. Any action in those cases would require joint action by Congress/Prez. Again - the de-dollarization WILL happen. But I see no evidence that anyone is thinking about the impact of that on the balance of power between Congress and Exec. Certainly Congress is no longer capable of doing anything other than bending over - and we are no longer capable of electing replacements.
This is a hilarious take as number of regulations and rules under dem presidents always exceeds those under republican ones.
Again it has to pointed out to the jewfrees, qbs, and sarcs of the world thst many of the EOs under Trump is undoing prior expansion, which is really what you leftists hate.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣤⣶⣶⣤⡀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠁⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠉⠉⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⣿⣿⣿⣦⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⣿⣧⣀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⢺⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⣬⣻⢿⣿⣿⡦
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠻⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⠛⠁
⠀⠀⠀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣽⣿⡿⠁⠀⠀
⠀⢀⡠⣿⣷⣤⡀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⠃⠀⠀⠀
⠰⠿DEMS⠿⠇⠀⠠⠿⠿⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀
Seattle caught hiring illegals to work in jails. Even against state laws which limit it to daca, citizens, and green card holders.
https://seattlered.com/jason-rantz/king-county-jail-illegal-hires/4114761
One of the best things I've seen by this white house.
https://x.com/WallStreetMav/status/1981541332200943900
LOL
The durable lesson: Don't confer powers on your team's guy that you wouldn't trust in the other team's hands.
That assumes that the other team will be in power again.
Last time Team Trump lost he didn't have soldiers in every major city and millions of personal police fanned out across the nation.
This time he's prepared to hold onto power.
LOL
And when you look at the array of those who will completely support such an unconstitutional coup, there is no conclusion other than - it will happen.
He's going to try. That is for certain. And his personal police will do his bidding without question. I do hope the military resists his commands to use violence against civilians. Though after three years of occupying domestic cities they might be conditioned to go along.
Remember when you used to call people paranoid?
The Dems faithful supporter sarc did it first!
Jade Helm! /Sarc
But the drunkard believes that Orange Bad Man will do what Obama didn't.
Just to humor his retarded ass: If he genuinely believes this, then shitposting here is worse than a waste of time.
Why isn't he (and his MSDNC cohorts) opening fire on the WH?
No surprise. You basically admit - any opposition to a coup is one that you yourself will oppose. There is no red line where you grow a set of balls to oppose a coup. Trump knew that about your cult a decade ago.
In the presence of opposition, you will support a coup.
In the absence of opposition, you will deny deny deny deny - and then support a coup.
I do believe that the military is one of the few that take their oath seriously. Unlike the cultees here - or voters - or the elected - or bureaucrats/appointees.
Unfortunately there is a difference in the oaths:
Enlisted take an oath of enlistment not an oath of office. Which explicitly includes - and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me,
Officers take an oath of office - which includes the well and faithfully execute the duties of the office judgement.
That is exactly the sort of discrepancy that can be (and will be) exploited for a coup. It is the officer corps - not the Prez - who prevented a coup last time. See the letters from ALL living SecDefs before the Jan6 riot - and ALL Chiefs of Staff a week later.
It is the officer corps that is undermined by Roberts and the SC majority and their 'Prez alone is God' doctrine. Even when the dissent includes the SPECIFIC - When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution...Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. the majority merely asserts that that is fear mongering on the basis of extreme hypotheticals about a future where the President feels empowered to violate federal criminal law.
I lived in a place where a coup happened. That is what is already happening here and the legal basis has been laid. Yes it will happen here - and most commenters (and frankly Reason itself if the donor class supports it which it will) already support that.
It's a funny-looking coup when the executive is trying to reduce the regulatory state and stop funding soft power sources that are the ones actually trying to attempt the coup.
Oh - and undermining the officer corps is not just what the Roberts SC majority did.
Hegseth is overtly splitting the officer corps into 'the woke' and 'the reliable'. They will be placed into different assignments - one cleaning toilet bowls on Guam and the other deployed to various domestic assignments that will become critical when the time is ripe. Politicizing the military and staking careers on that basis is exactly how coups happen.
The NG deployments are happening to identify the states which will do the same. The Constitution puts 'appointing officers' at the state level precisely to prevent the feds from appointing officers. But that merely changes the calculus/arithmetic of a coup/tyranny. Also the NG deployments provide the legal basis for the SC to undermine Posse Comitatus and federalization of the NG on behalf of God Almighty.
The reason the coup failed last time is because the attempt occurred in Jan. The attempt will happen before election 2028 this time.
Looks like you have 3 years to sweat it out. We will then, once again, have the opportunity to laugh at you.
More accurately - you have three years to see what's happening, join with it, and learn to notify the authorities.
You really should stop watching maddow on repeat.
This is hilarious after you cheered abuses by the doj for J6.
Epic level wishcasting. When the village idiot is also the town drunk.
Will you admit that you are completely full of BS, endlessly, when that doesn't happen?
Or will you just keep selling leftard TDS conspiracy theories?
Remember when he sent soldiers to D.C. and you said he would never send troops to other cities? I do.
Cite?
I’m not a loser like Jesse.
It really didn't take a rocket-scientist to figure out you'd....
"just keep selling leftard TDS conspiracy theories"
It is a fact that most in these comments defended Trump’s military occupation of D.C. by saying it’s a federal district not a state, and that he’d never ever do that in another city.
If I was a loser like Jesse I’d go back to those articles and do some copying and pasting to prove it. I’m not going to because every honest person knows I’m telling the truth. Now Trump is sending troops to other cities in defiance of that argument. Honest people admit this. Trump defenders can’t. Simply cannot do it. I could copy and paste pages of comments and it won’t change the beliefs of you or any other Trump defender. You’re brainwashed tools.
In response to your endless "sanctuary cities RULE" or you're a "Trump defender" BS.
The Constitution grants federal full-enforcement in D.C.
It also grants 'Invasion' control in every State as Federal Law is enforced by the Federal Government.
Your TDS accusation looses legitimacy no matter what side of the isle you want to swing (and a miss) on and you know it thus is why you have to start making silly "well which one" BS.
Invading someone else home is a violation. If State's won't assist in upholding federal law Trump has every-right to bring in the Federal Guard. Even the 9th court isn't as corrupt as you are. Deal with it.
I never said anything either way about sanctuary city either way. As far as invasion goes, calling immigration such is beyond dishonest. The military is for repelling soldiers, not immigrants. That’s dumb.
LOL... Sure, Sure. Calling law-enforcement to remove non-soldier people that have broken into your home is dumb. /s
Do you ever actually listen/reflect-on the pure-BS you entertain?
You must think 'Naturalization' is only about foreign soldier huh?
Surely if the federal has no authority to protect it's borders from non-solder invasion it couldn't possibly have authority to naturalize anyone but foreign soldiers.
Manipulate, Corrupt, Spin it on it's head, Move the goal-post, Change the subject, Self-project ... What-ever it TAKES to excuse every violation the leftard-mind desires.
There is no non-soldier invasion. It is Trump dishonestly equating immigration with invasion to invoke emergency powers, same as when the Democrats dishonestly equated J6 with insurrection to invoke emergency powers.
I spoke out against Democrats when they did it and I oppose what Trump is doing.
Whereas you determine right and wrong based upon who, not what.
You hate this amorphous left and everything they do because of who is doing it.
I step back and look at what, not who.
I’d invite you to try it, but you can’t. You are unable.
So not only do you want to ignore the difference between Breaking-in and Being-invited you also want to pretend a Break-in of 18,600,000 people doesn't qualifies as an invasion.
It must be just an UN-invited party?
Just a meeting on how to find a job?
And what other full-blown BS excuse leftards can make-up pretending that Breaking & Entering is just A-Okay.
Does every true Scotsman know this sarcles?
Trump 2028!
Fails to mention how many were in effect before Trump took office - over 45.
DEMOCRATS DID IT FIRST! THAT MAKES IT OK!
They never learn.
Democrats passed the legislation so only Democrats can do it?
I think that's what you're really trying to say.
“I’ll take “Things sarc never said’ for five hundred, Alex.”
Everyone knows that's what you mean.
Does it really matter if you can admit it to yourself or not?
No you idiot, he's pointing out that most of the "emergencies" were not caused by Trump.
So? Doesn’t disprove anything the author said. It only justifies Trump because Biden, Obama, Democrats shut up you hypocrite.
Never-mind that difference in Obama's Emergency 'DACA' being 100% congress unlawful or Biden's Emergency of 'Loan Forgiving' being 100% congress/constitutional unlawful.
OH NO. Trumps 'emergencies' of actually enforcing laws congress wrote/constitution states must be TYRANNICAL. Maybe the 'emergency' is really lawless leftards in politics?? eh?
That happens to be sarc’s favorite number.
And since his favorite animal is a colt...
Wait..
I think in part why Trump broke the alcoholic logical fallacy tosser is that sarcles ❤️ Colt 45 and Trump was potus 45.
It was sacred to him like Biden’s coronation, hence sarc defending and even celebrating a law enforcement officer shooting and killing an unarmed citizen that was trespassing on public property.
Viva la Raza!!!
Twink.
Uncle Tom
So, you think the BLM and Antifa should just have been allowed to burn down police stations and federal buildings and take over neighborhoods? The borders should have been left wide open? The tens of millions of illegal aliens that poured over the open border, many of whom are hostile agents of foreign powers or dangerous criminals, should just be allowed to remain? The "cartels" attacking us with chemical weapons who have killed hundreds of thousands of Americans should just be allowed to do business in peace? All of that, rather than use the armed forces at the disposal of the federal government to do something about it? Just let all that go, to spare you the discomfort of seeing National Guard soldiers at your bus stop? You wouldn't recognize an actual emergency if it was dancing in drag in front of you, Katherine.
She has a recent debate where she effectively says she's happy with all those things. Replacement theory uber alles.
I've spent the last 25 years writing about the need to take debt and spending seriously.
And how many years will it take to make you aware that the cause isn't pols, but voters?
Tocqueville warned us a long time ago that that would be the demise of democracy.