Collins opposes H.J. Res. 46

“Congress has given President Trump the authority to act here, and he has acted according to that authority. The democratic process is intact.”

WASHINGTON — Ranking Member Doug Collins (R-Ga.) spoke on the floor of the House of Representatives today outlining President Trump’s authority to declare a national emergency. Below are the remarks as prepared: Ranking Member Doug Collins: On Feb. 15, the president exercised his clear authority under a clear federal statute — duly-enacted by Congress — to use funds already appropriated by Congress for the purpose of securing our southern border. Let me quote directly from that federal statute, Title 10, United States Code, Section 2808: “Construction authority in the event of a . . . national emergency. In the event of . . . the declaration by the president of a national emergency in accordance with the National Emergencies Act . . . that requires use of the armed forces, the Secretary of Defense, without regard to any other provision of law, may undertake military construction projects, and may authorize the Secretaries of the military departments to undertake military construction projects, not otherwise authorized by law that are necessary to support such use of the armed forces. Such projects may be undertaken only within the total amount of funds that have been appropriated for military construction . . . that have not been obligated.” The statute itself and the president’s actions in accordance with it rest solidly within the separation of powers and are certainly constitutional. If you’re citing the Supreme Court’s Youngstown case against the president’s action during today’s debate, then I suggest you haven’t read that case. The reasoning of the Youngstown case only applies when the president is acting unilaterally and not pursuant to a duly-enacted statute by Congress. President Trump made this emergency declaration in accordance with a statute passed by both chambers of Congress, so the Youngstown case is wholly inapplicable to the discussion before us today. Since the National Emergency Act was enacted in 1976, every single president — Republican and Democrat — has used it to declare an emergency in circumstances that were less dire, that threatened fewer lives, than the one raging on our southern border. President Obama, for example, declared a national emergency 10 times, including to address transnational criminal organizations and to suspend the entry of certain persons contributing to the situation in Venezuela. The Supreme Court has never overturned even one of those 31 previous emergency declarations. In the 1981 case of Dames & Moore v. Regan, the Supreme Court upheld actions taken by the Reagan and Carter Administrations to address the Iranian hostage crisis. In that case, President Carter had used his emergency powers under the Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977. The Supreme Court upheld those actions, stating that, because President Carter had acted pursuant to a congressional delegation of authority, “a contrary ruling would mean that the Federal Government as a whole lacked the power exercised by the president, and that we are not prepared to say.” The same reasoning applies in this case. Congress has given President Trump the authority to act here, and he has acted according to that authority. The democratic process is intact. Troops have been ordered to protect the border in the past. Indeed, the fundamental mission of the U.S. military, throughout its history, has been to defend the integrity of America’s borders. In this case, the president is directing the military under the clear terms of the authorizing statute to build a wall to support the troops already at the border. This wall would protect the troops themselves, limit the number of illegal entrants and criminals entering the country and reduce the size of the area requiring patrol. Nothing in this or any other statute says the border must be completely overrun by chaos to justify the president’s declaration of a national emergency. Consider a crack in the hull of a ship that, at first, allows only a narrow but steady stream of ocean water into the vessel. Ignore that crack. Point out that the rest of the ship is in good shape and that nobody on deck can see the widening crack or its consequences anyhow. Wait a bit longer. Ignore the danger for a while more. Realize too late that the integrity of the ship is compromised and everyone who depends on it is now at risk because the damage has been done. In that moment, we see how much of a danger that crack posed and how foolish it was to ignore the problem. It’s just as foolish and dangerous for Congress to take no action to uphold America’s sovereignty or to secure its borders from drugs, human traffickers and people who act as though they are above the laws that Americans depend on this very chamber to establish and uphold. The crisis to our south grows worse day by day, and the president is addressing it lawfully under title 10, Section 2808, of the U.S. Code. I urge all my colleagues to join me in opposing this joint resolution.