Termination of National Emergency Declared By the President on February 2019

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on February 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.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad about one thing today coming here. I am glad that, for many of the years I have been here, I came through the Rules Committee, and others, and talked about Article I authority. I am glad now to see that we have others who have now figured that Article I probably needs to be enforced.

What is interesting is it is selective enforcement against a President they don't like, for a purpose they don't want, for a wall that they don't want to have because securing a border is not the top agenda for them.

I get it if you don't like it. But argue with the law. 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 are citing the Supreme Court case of Youngstown against the President's action today during this debate, then I suggest you haven't read the case. That reasoning of the Youngstown case only applies when the President is acting unilaterally and not pursuant to a duly-elected statute by Congress.

Maybe the selective memory here is because the previous President actually did that when he instituted the DACA program under no things that he could have found to actually work on.

Then we discuss the issue of, is there an actual emergency on the border? You know, a President once noted, he said: ``We have seen a significant rise in apprehensions and processing of children and individuals from Central America who are crossing into the United States in the Rio Grande Valley areas of the Southwest border. The individuals who embark upon this perilous journey are subject to violent crime, abuse, extortion, as they rely on dangerous human smuggling networks to transport them through Central America and Mexico.''

Most may think that was from the current President. It was not. It was from President Obama when he was requesting more money for the emergency on the border.

The problem is the factual basis is there. We sat in a hearing today in the Judiciary Committee, and I had to look at the faces of our Border Patrol agents and ICE agents, and others dealing with this on a day-to-day basis while all they get, many times from this body, is hate and derision when they are doing their job that we sent them to do.

My problem comes back here--if we can argue about different things-- this was under the law and done by Republicans and Democrats for the last almost 40 years. If you want to fix this, then you have done what you should do under law. You have brought your resolution of disapproval.

But if you really wanted to take Article I authority, then actually look at the law itself. If you actually want to change it that is what this body ought to be doing.

If you don't like the fact that the President can do something and especially my friends across the aisle who don't want this President to do anything, then fix the law. Go into this emergency declaration and say, we will define what a national emergency is. We will do that.

They don't want to do that because they don't want to bind the hands because they know that the law was written for a purpose that has been upheld for over 40 years. This is simply a show. It is a farce.

Let's just get to the political aspect of this and say, Mr. Speaker, we don't like the President. We don't like what he is doing. Oops, we forgot about this law, and the President said, I will act under the authority given to me by Congress.

You can have all the arguments you want, but at the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, when you cast this vote, don't hide behind Article I. Don't hide between separation of powers. Go to the law and look at what the law says and vote ``no.''

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source