|
On
September 10 of 2009, Obama reinstituted
the National State of
Emergency.
It
may be argued that Obama is invoking the
Constitution for the sake of “public
safety,” that is until you look at the
facts — the H1N1 “pandemic” does not
threaten the safety of most Americans. It
is far less deadly than seasonal flu.
When was the last time a president
declared a national emergency over
seasonal flu?
A
state of emergency (regardless of the
pretext) allows Obama to do a number of
things. As Dr. Harold C.
Relyea, a specialist in
national government with the
Congressional Research Service (CRS) of
the Library of Congress, has written,
“when the President formally declares a
national emergency, he may seize
property, organize and control the means
of production, seize commodities, assign
military forces abroad, institute martial
law, seize and control all transportation
and communication, regulate the operation
of private enterprise, restrict travel,
and, in a variety of ways,
control the lives of United
States citizens.”
Obama’s declaration,
however, is incidental because the United
States has been under a state of
emergency since September 14, 2001. Bush
extended this “emergency”
(against a bogus terrorist
threat) on August 28,
2008.
“Will President Obama
allow the state of national emergency,
first declared by President George W.
Bush on 9/14/01 and re-declared seven
times, to remain in effect?” asked
Peter Dale Scott and
Dan Hamburg
on February 10, 2009.
The
National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C.
1601-1651) is a United States federal law
passed in 1976 to stop open-ended states
of national emergency and formalize the
power of Congress to provide certain
checks and balances on the emergency
powers of the President.
The act sets a limit of two years on
states of national emergency.
It also imposes certain "procedural
formalities" on the President when
invoking such powers.
The perceived need for the law arose from
the scope and number of laws granting
special powers to the executive in times
of national emergency (or public
danger).
At least two constitutional rights are
subject to revocation during a state of
emergency:
The right of habeas corpus, under Article
1, Section 9;
The right to a grand jury for members of
the National Guard when in actual
service, under Fifth Amendment.
In addition, many provisions of statutory
law are contingent on a state of national
emergency, as many as 500 by one
count.
It was due in part to concern that a
declaration of "emergency" for one
purpose should not invoke every possible
executive emergency power that Congress
in 1976 passed the National Emergencies
Act.
Among other provisions, this act requires
the President to declare formally a
national emergency and to specify the
statutory authorities to be used under
such a declaration.
There were 32 declared national
emergencies between 1976 and 2001.
Most of these were for the purpose of
restricting trade with certain foreign
entities under the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (50
U.S.C. 1701-1707).
The
National Emergencies Act is part of a
larger framework designed specifically
for the implementation of martial law.
The law allows the president to revoke
the right of habeas corpus under Article
1, Section 9. It also grants special
powers to the executive in times of
national emergency and underscores the
threat the executive poses to the civil
liberties of Americans, regardless of the
stipulations in Section 301.
Revoking
the right of habeas corpus is
unconstitutional. So is declaring
a national emergency without
congressional approval. The
Constitution declares, “The Privilege of
the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be
suspended, unless when in cases of
rebellion or invasion the public safety
may require it.”
Obama’s
national emergency declaration —
regardless of its emphasis on the
bureaucratic functioning of HHS and
Medicare — is simply another example of
how the executive now functions as a
dictatorship.
The
declaration needs to be considered in a
larger context of authoritarian laws and
presidential directives that violate both
the letter and the spirit of the
law.
The
USA Patriot Act allows “sneek and peek”
searches without notification, the
collection of information (medical,
financial, and even library records)
without showing probable cause. Roving
“John Doe” wiretaps violate the
First, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth and
Fourteenth Amendments.
Executive
Order 13438 allows the president and the
Secretary of the Treasury to confiscate
the assets of “certain persons” who
oppose the U.S. invasion and occupation
of Iraq (First, Fourth and Fifth
Amendments violated).
The
John Warner Defense Authorization Act,
mentioned above, gives the president the
authority to declare martial law and take
control of National Guard troops without
state governor authorization. If applied,
Warner would x-out the entire
Constitution and Bill of Rights. It would
also violate Posse
Comitatus.
NSP
51 and HSPD 20 (the National Security and
Homeland Security Presidential Directive)
allow the president to declare a
“national emergency” for any reason
without congressional approval. These
directives would result in the suspension
of constitutional government and the
militarization of justice and law
enforcement. NSPD 51 supersedes the
National Emergency Act and supposed
congressional oversight. If
applied, the Constitution would be null
and void.
The
Military Commissions Act trashes habeas
corpus and allows the government to
detain anyone (including U.S. citizens)
by declaring them enemy combatants. It
also allows torture and provides immunity
for military and intelligence officials.
The act violates the Sixth and Fourth
Amendments, Article 1 Section 9, Clause 2
(covering habeas corpus) of the
Constitution. It also violates
the Geneva Convention.
Finally,
the long-standing FISA (Foreign
Intelligence and Surveillance Act) allows
the Obama administration to spy on any
American without court approval. It
provides a meaningless and phony court
review and secret procedures and a
worthless report to Congress.
Obama’s
“national emergency” in response to a
pandemic that is nothing for the sort is
another example of the executive wantonly
violating the Constitution. It does not
matter if the details of the so-called
emergency declaration concern the
bureaucratic operation of government. It
is a violation of the principles our
founders had in mind when they formulated
our (now mostly moribund) Constitutional
republic.
Land of the Free???
|
0
