Latest news with #LibertyandNationalSecurityProgram
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The Trump Administration Needs Better Opposition
Donald Trump needs better enemies. More accurately, the American people need the president and his allies to have a higher quality opposition. In office, President Trump has embraced some truly terrible—and occasionally dangerous—policies, including federalizing National Guard troops and mobilizing U.S. Marines to deal with riots that really should be left to California officials to handle or fumble as their abilities allow. But his opponents insist on embracing lunacy and ineffectiveness and making the president look reasonable by comparison, effectively giving his actions a pass. "Donald Trump, without consulting with California's law enforcement leaders, commandeered 2,000 of our state's National Guard members to deploy on our streets. Illegally, and for no reason," complained Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom after the president turned local rioting into a federal issue. Newsom expanded on his objections in a glitch-filled speech that focused more on Trump than the riots. It played into the reputation for incompetence he's gained over years of ignoring his state's problems, including all of the missteps that led to the recent wildfires in and around Los Angeles. Those fires didn't exactly cover Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass in glory either, and neither has her response to the chaos. She's alternated between supporting demonstrators protesting the federal immigration raids that sparked the riots and vowing crackdowns on violence. One minute she touts her work with "community organizations, legal advocates, and local leaders to ensure that every resident knows their rights" and the next she reminds Angelenos that downtown is under curfew. That's unfortunate, because the feckless California officials raise legitimate concerns about the president's actions. There are good reasons to object to a president responding to local events with federal troops. "Preemptive nationwide deployment of the military is the very opposite of using the military as a 'last resort,'" warns Elizabeth Goitein of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program. "It is so wildly out of keeping with how the Insurrection Act and 10 U.S.C. § 12406 have been interpreted and applied that it should be entitled to no deference by the courts." The law that President Trump relied on—10 U.S.C. § 12406—allows the president to "call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State" to repel invasions, suppress rebellions, or enforce the law when regular forces are insufficient. Invoking that law over local disorder before state and local officials have had much of a chance to do anything is a stretch of the law's intent as well as a slap at federalism. The law says nothing authorizing the use of regular military forces, leaving the impression that the Marines Trump dispatched are just hitching a ride on his presidential memorandum to bypass the Posse Comitatus Act's restrictions on the domestic use of the military. Which means that Newsom and Bass had a great opportunity to show their chops and object to federal interference—if they were up to the demands of that role. They're not. Worse, though, are the rioters themselves. As Matthew Ormseth and James Queally described the scene for Los Angeles Times readers, "some in the crowd lobbed bottles and fireworks at the LAPD," "vandals set fire to a row of Waymos," and "people wearing masks flung chunks of concrete—and even a few electric scooters—at" California Highway Patrol officers. That speaks for itself—but not as loudly as the idiots throwing Molotov cocktails at police. Rioting understandably became the dominant news story, overshadowing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids that originally set off protests before they turned violent. Smarter protesters would have kept demonstrations peaceful and attention focused on arrests that we were told would target violent criminals but too often ensnare harmless people. "Federal immigration officials appeared to target day laborers in raids Monday at a Home Deport in Santa Ana," the Los Angeles NBC affiliate reported this week. Traditional gathering places for immigrants seeking work—and not so many vicious gangbangers—have been targeted across the country. "Stephen Miller, a top White House aide and architect of the president's immigration agenda, asked ICE officials to step up the pace of immigrant deportations, including in Home Depot parking lots and at 7-Eleven Stores," according to The Wall Street Journal. ICE has also gone after immigrants navigating the bureaucratic path to legal immigration and even citizens who were wrongly detained. Those outrages were pushed into the background when rioting inevitably grabbed the headlines. Not that Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson gives a damn about keeping the message straight. As violent protests spread across the country, he urged his constituents to "rise up" and "resist." Apparently, he doesn't want to miss out on the excitement of watching parts of his city burn. Not everybody is impressed by this version of opposition to the Trump administration. "I unapologetically stand for free speech, peaceful demonstrations, and immigration—but this is not that," Sen. John Fetterman (D–Penn.) warned this week. "This is anarchy and true chaos. My party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings, and assaulting law enforcement." Fetterman has, somewhat surprisingly, emerged as a voice of sanity for his party. He's called Democrats to account over the antisemitism of the party's progressive wing and now for confusing tantrums in the street with effective opposition. A few more Democrats like him would go a long way towards rescuing the party from its self-inflicted wounds and giving the U.S. a functioning political opposition. The country could really use a functioning opposition. The Trump administration's turn towards economic nationalism, unilateral power, authoritarianism, and xenophobia cry out for criticism and alternative solutions. That criticism should be peaceful and those alternatives should be sensibly presented. Ideally, they should also advance liberty and limit government. For the moment, though, that may be too much to ask of Democrats. Many of them are still wrestling with the temptations of appearing to be either inept or dangerous lunatics. The post The Trump Administration Needs Better Opposition appeared first on
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump's Travel Ban Targets Black Migrants as Protests and Deportations Spread
As demonstrations against the California immigration crackdown continue, President Donald Trump's new order banning travel to the U.S. for citizens of a dozen countries — most of them in Africa and the Middle East — went into effect on Monday. Since protests started in the Los Angeles area last week, Trump has deployed more than 2,000 members of the National Guard. This has followed several days during which people have gathered to condemn a series of deportation raids that have led to more than 100 arrests. Democratic leaders have assailed the administration's decision to send the National Guard. 'What we're seeing in Los Angeles is chaos that is provoked by the administration,' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said during a press conference on Sunday. 'When you raid Home Depot and workplaces, when you tear parents and children apart, and when you run armored caravans through our streets, you cause fear and you cause panic.' She added that 'we stand with all Angelenos,' and emphasized the importance of protesting peacefully. A longtime critic of Trump, California Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X on Sunday that 'commandeering a state's National Guard without consulting the Governor of that state is illegal and immoral.' Trump has repeatedly balked at demands that he withdraw troops, prompting Newsom to sue the administration. The last time deployment occurred without the request of a governor was in 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson federalized National Guard members to protect protesters in Alabama at the height of the Civil Rights Movement, Elizabeth Goitein, the senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, told CNN. Additionally, The New York Times has reported that, in 1963, President John F. Kennedy used the powers of his office to override a governor's objections and deploy troops to integrate the University of Alabama. While some weekend protests have largely dispersed, others are expected in the days ahead in response to the new travel ban. Read on to learn more about how this ban differs from the one under the first Trump administration and where communities can find resources. This story will be updated. The proclamation, which Trump has framed as a matter of public safety, prohibits citizens of Afghanistan, Chad, Eritrea, Equatorial Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, the Republic of the Congo, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen from entering the U.S. Trump's ban doesn't revoke visas that had already been issued to people from these countries, according to guidance from the U.S. State Department. New applicants from the countries on the list must meet specific criteria to be exempted from the ban and receive a visa. Additionally, citizens of Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela who are outside the U.S. and don't possess a valid visa now have heightened restrictions. Most of the affected countries are in Africa and the Middle East and are facing war or other social and political crises. Notably, Haiti was a target of Trump and his allies during the 2024 presidential campaign, when the president claimed, without evidence, that Haitian migrants in Ohio were eating people's pets. Those baseless assertions fueled an uptick in security threats against migrants from the island. For the millions of Black migrants in the U.S., the new ban likely comes as no surprise. 'I knew in November that there would be trying and exhausting times ahead,' Farah Larrieux, a native of Haiti living in South Florida, told Capital B earlier this year. 'But this, this is much more than that.' Trump's 2017 ban was narrower in focus, mostly targeting Muslim-majority countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The former ban was amended several times to remove some countries from the list and add others, such as North Korea and Venezuela. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban in 2018; former President Joe Biden repealed it in 2021. He condemned the ban as 'a stain on our national conscience,' and said that it was 'inconsistent' with the country's 'long history of welcoming people of all faiths and no faith at all.' The 2017 ban triggered an array of courtroom challenges. Immigration experts expect the new ban to withstand such pushback, saying that its greater precision — including offering specific exemptions and providing more reasoning for the restrictions — might help it to survive legal scrutiny. 'I imagine there will be legal challenges to the current ban, but I do think that they've been very careful in how they've crafted it,' Mariam Masumi Daud, an immigration lawyer, told NPR. She underscored her concern about the impact the ban will have on vulnerable communities. 'This is going to have a global impact, as well, on our reputation in the world,' she said. 'And we're basically closing our doors for immigrants, and it's very unfortunate that this type of policy has become normalized.' Organizations such as the International Rescue Committee and the Black Alliance for Just Immigration provide a variety of legal services to migrants, including law clinics that share information and resources; representation for processes including naturalization and citizenship; and screenings that clarify the path to lawful status. Immigration advocates also urge people who could be affected by the ban to review their documents to make sure that they're valid and accurate and, if necessary, secure legal counsel to determine what strategic options might be available to them. Trump has said that the ban list is 'subject to revision based on whether material improvements are made' and that 'new countries can be added as threats emerge around the world.' The Legal Aid Society and other groups are keeping detailed, country-specific information about the ban and offering updates as necessary. The post Trump's Travel Ban Targets Black Migrants as Protests and Deportations Spread appeared first on Capital B News.
Yahoo
09-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump's memo activating the National Guard doesn't specify L.A. It could apply anywhere and preemptively, legal expert says
The White House memo federalizing National Guard troops in response to protests in Los Angeles this weekend doesn't specify a city or state for their deployment. It also authorizes their activation in areas where protests 'are occurring or are likely to occur.' A legal scholar said that means the memo could apply anywhere and preemptively. President Donald Trump's activation of California National Guard troops could go beyond Los Angeles and the unrest that took place there over the weekend. The memo he issued on Saturday that federalized the National Guard in the wake of protests against his immigration raids doesn't specify a city or state for their deployment. It also authorizes the activation of the National Guard in areas where protests 'are occurring or are likely to occur.' According to Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program, that means it could apply nationwide and even before any protests actually take place. 'No president has ever federalized the National Guard for purposes of responding to potential future civil unrest anywhere in the country,' she wrote Sunday in a thread on X. 'Preemptive deployment is literally the opposite of deployment as a last resort. It would be a shocking abuse of power and the law.' The White House didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. The memo invokes Title 10 of U.S. Code 12406 to task the Guard with temporarily protecting Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and other government personnel performing federal functions. That's because the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 largely prevents federal troops from engaging in civil law enforcement domestically, leaving the Guard with force-protection duties and other logistical support for ICE. During Sunday's protests in downtown Los Angeles, the Guard protected the federal building while the L.A. Police Department and the California Highway Patrol pushed demonstrators back and made arrests. Still, Trump ordered the deployment despite objections from California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said he is suing the administration and claimed it illegally sent in the troops. There is an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that would allow troops to take a more active role in law enforcement, but the Insurrection Act has not been invoked yet. Nevertheless, Trump's memo said members of the 'regular Armed Forces' can be deployed as well to support the 'protection of Federal functions and property.' The Defense Department said on Sunday that 500 Marines at Twentynine Palms are in a 'prepared to deploy status' in case they are needed. When asked Sunday if he planned to send U.S. troops to Los Angeles, Trump replied, 'We're gonna have troops everywhere. We're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart like it was under Biden.' The Brennan Center's Goitein pointed out that Trump's memo doesn't cite a law that would authorize deployment of active-duty troops. 'The administration would likely claim an inherent constitutional right to protect federal personnel and property (in keeping with the memo's language). But the Posse Comitatus requires 'express' authorization—not a claim of implied power,' she added. 'In short: Don't let the absence of the words 'Insurrection Act' fool you. Trump has authorized the deployment of troops anywhere in the country where protests against ICE activity might occur. That is a huge red flag for democracy in the United States.' This story was originally featured on
The Mainichi
08-06-2025
- Politics
- The Mainichi
The 911 presidency: Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Call it the 911 presidency. Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors. Whether it's leveling punishing tariffs, deploying troops to the border or sidelining environmental regulations, Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion. An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. "What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president," said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called "Liberation Day" tariffs. Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. Growing concerns over actions The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. "The temptation is clear," said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. "What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now." Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. "It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit," Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. "And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action." The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. "President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden -- wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Trump frequently cites 1977 law to justify actions Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces "an unusual and extraordinary threat" from abroad "to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States." In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act, to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has ceded its power to the presidency Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers -- including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited -- that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort, forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. "Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges," said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. "Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act." Trump, Yoo said, "has just elevated it to another level." Trump's allies support his moves Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. "We believe -- and we're right -- that we are in an emergency," Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. "You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies," Vance said. "I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain." Vance continued, "These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency." Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. "He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a "path toward autocracy and suppression."
Yomiuri Shimbun
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Yomiuri Shimbun
The 911 Presidency: Trump Flexes Emergency Powers in His Second Term
AP file photo President Donald Trump holds up an executive order after signing it at an indoor Presidential Inauguration parade event in Washington, Jan. 20, 2025. WASHINGTON (AP) — Call it the 911 presidency. Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors. Whether it's leveling punishing tariffs, deploying troops to the border or sidelining environmental regulations, Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion. An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. 'What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,' said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. Growing concerns over actions The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. 'The temptation is clear,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. 'What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now.' Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. 'It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,' Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. 'And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action.' The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. 'President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Trump frequently cites 1977 law to justify actions Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces 'an unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.' In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act, to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has ceded its power to the presidency Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort, forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. 'Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,' said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. 'Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.' Trump, Yoo said, 'has just elevated it to another level.' Trump's allies support his moves Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. 'We believe — and we're right — that we are in an emergency,' Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. 'You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,' Vance said. 'I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.' Vance continued, 'These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.' Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. 'He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a 'path toward autocracy and suppression.'
