In Case of Emergency: The Dubious Legality of Trump Allies' Draft EO

[Nevilledog]

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/in-case-of-emergency--the-dubious-legality-of-trump-allies-draft-eo

President Trump has invoked the words “national security” as a justification for all manner of dubious policy moves over the past year.

He declared his tariffs had given us “the strongest national security we’ve ever had” (“THANK YOU MISTER TARIFF!!!”). His Interior Department insisted that terminating offshore wind projects “addresses emerging national security risks, including the rapid evolution of the relevant adversary technologies.” His Justice Department even justified the ongoing construction of his $400 million White House ballroom by calling the project “imperative for national security” and warning that “halting construction would imperil the President and others who live and work in the White House.” He has also gone so far as to declare national emergencies to pursue his agenda on trade, immigration, the environment and more.

So when Trump responded to the struggle over the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (SAVE) America Act in Congress with the ominous warning, “I have searched the depths of Legal Arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject, and will be presenting an irrefutable one in the very near future”—promising minutes later to present said Legal Argument “in the form of an Executive Order”—it was easy enough to guess in what direction his stratagems tended.

Late last month, the Washington Post published a story that seemed to elucidate the matter: Activists who say they’re in coordination with the White House are circulating a draft executive order that claims Chinese interference in the 2020 election in order to, yes, declare a national emergency that would purportedly empower the president to exercise unprecedented power over voting.

When asked about the effort by press pool reporters, Trump responded, “Who told you that?” He proceeded to deny any involvement.

*snip*