Washington State Challenging Border Wall Money Diversion
A 34-foot Sea Arc patrol boat provides security as a Seawolf-class fast-attack submarine transits to Naval Base Kitsap-Bremerton. (Chief Nelson Doromal/Navy)
The State of Washington may not share a border with Mexico. This hasn’t stopped them from going to federal court to challenge the President’s decision to divert funds from the military to the border wall. They stand to lose construction money related to a naval base in their state with this move.
Those challenging the transfer of funds argue that Congress has the power of the purse and should be the ones that make this decision. Not the president. Congress has the power of the purse, to raise and disburse funds. But, once those funds are disbursed, other laws also come into play.
This is where those challenging the decision, and the courts, play a role. Those opposed to the wall are coming up with different ways to leverage the courts to fight against the wall’s construction.
From the Navy Times:
Washington is far from the U.S.-Mexico border, but Attorney General Bob Ferguson argues that the state nevertheless would be harmed if the administration’s plans go forward. The Pentagon has shifted $3.6 billion from military construction projects — one of them in Washington state — to build 175 miles of border fencing in four states.
Losing that construction money — $89 million for a pier and other security improvements at Naval Base Kitsap west of Seattle — would cost the state $2.6 million in tax revenue over the next two years, and that’s enough to give Washington standing to challenge the administration’s plans in court, Ferguson said.
Lawyers for Washington and the Justice Department argued the case before Rothstein on Thursday amid fast-moving developments in the case.
The Sierra Club has asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a related challenge to issue an order by Friday blocking the government from using the money. Meanwhile, the government is already working on sections of the wall and is planning to break ground as soon as Friday on other sections, near El Paso, Texas, and Yuma, Arizona.
The opinions of different federal judges provide a checkerboard pattern of results. Judges in two states ruled against the transfer of funds. One issued an order to stop the expenditure, another ruled against the expenditure. However, this judge didn’t stop the funds’ movement pending further legal activity. An appeals court overturned the restrictive judge’s decision and allowed wall spending to continue.
You could read more at Navy Times.
Category: Military issues, Navy, Politics
A border wall stifles the importation of voters for those that hold power in Washington State. When you get right down to it, that’s all this is really about in the end.
Screw ’em. Maybe their state should pick up some of the tab for improvements on military facilities. Wonder how many communities that lost out on the BRAC deals would like to go back and sweeten the pot to keep those facilities open? God forbid that the Washington State facilities suffer the same fate as Brookley AFB Alabama.
The President has the responsibility to defend the Country as well as the Constitution. I, personally, think he is doing a fine job on both. A wall thru the sand “Trumps” a line in the sand, anyday.
Didn’t an appeals court just rule that the DoD can divert funds for the wall? Yeah, here it is, all of two weeks ago; https://www.texastribune.org/2020/01/09/court-rules-trump-can-use-4-billion-military-funds-border-wall/
So they’re court shopping for a more (much more) liberal 9th Circuit judge to buy their story of woe is me, we need our tax money. Worse, and more likely, they’re throwing good tax money at the “problem” so they can challenge Orange Man Bad.
I’m sure that they’d like to have more money to hand out to illegal aliens and Antifa fleabags to buy their votes.
I thought all those hippies in Seattle hated the Navy anyway. But now they’re crying about not getting money to expand the Navy’s bases? Their argument has an odor to it.
Ironically, Mexico is turning away migrants at its southern border if they come from Guatemala or countries further south.
Also, US immigration is closely monitoring pregnant women from other countries coming to the US to have their babies born here.
Our state AG, a George Soros “soy boy”, is for military spending but is against military readiness. He is fighting against the EA-18 Growlers at NAS Whidbey Island. They have a off base runway near the town of Coupeville (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Whidbey+Island/@48.1885376,-122.6361679,1497m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x548f8a245ab1ca67:0x821486fac51acfa8!8m2!3d47.9982761!4d-122.4395026) to practice carrier landings before deployments and a lot of Seattle Elites don’t like the noise when they visit their vacation homes they built nearby.
Nothing pisses me off quite like that shit. You buy property next to an airport that’s 25% below market rate due to location and then bitch to the government about the noise? The balls on people. The worst is that the government does shit to appease them. Residents by our intl airport several years back all got free new windows.
Just like the folks who can’t wait to buy a house in an unspoiled rural area and get away from the nasty old city, then complain about the smells from the beef and dairy and bacon critters and tractors slowing traffic on those quaint, scenic, country roads.
Did not a panel Federal Judges rule that the administration’s reprogramming of funds is cool with the law and with in the authority of the President?