By: Donald Cyphers
Syndicated by: Montana News
Washington D.C.--//MNA Press//-- House Democrats under Pelosi suffered a major legal defeat in their attempt to stop President Trump from securing the border in his efforts to end the humanitarian and security crisis at the southern American borders.
It is highly improper for the Democrat House, just because they are not in agreement with President Donald Trump's policies to arbitrarily ask the Court to intervene and willfully change rules to fit their liberal political dispute with and between both branches of government.
Furthermore, it means that Congress passed laws and created or appropriated funds for any President to use as he sees fit within applicable constraints.
Pelosi's Democrats are furious that President Trump is using the money within those constraints that which were imposed by Congress over 30 years ago or more.
The Constitution clearly outlines the separation of powers and principles, a Court can not come in and take sides and be used as a weapon by one political party to change laws because that particular party does not like the President or his policies.
In this particular case, the Court stated in their ruling that the Congressional House Democrats and speaker of the house "Pelosi", has not reached the legal merits in this case and that the U.S. House Democrats lack legal standing in case of United States House Of Representatives Vs. Trump Administration i.e., Steven T. Mnuchin/Secretary of the United States Department of the Treasury et al.
In the case of action 19-cv-00969-TNM, the Court made it very clear that it was a highly inappropriate role for a judiciary to resolve any dispute that their might be between the House Democrats and the Senate Republicans as both of these are Federal Government elected by the people.
What does that mean?
It means that a Court is not implying that members of Congress can not litigate against the Executive Branch to protect their powers, and since the Democrats had the clear burden to prove and show the Court that they have established standing or instead called "Legal Standing."
There is no legally binding precedent ever in the United States Courts that have ever allowed the higher Courts to change laws just because one political party is mad at the other political party or is in dispute with the President of the United States.
According to the example set of Raines and Arizona State Legislature, the Court denied the House Democrats and "Pelosi." In other words, the Court refuses to assume any jurisdiction to proceed to any of the legal merits as they don't exist because the Democrat-controlled house does not have "Legal Standing."
So President Trump, spend away to build that wall using the President's Emergency Declaration. Congress has explicitly allowed ANY Executive branch to transfer funds for any unforeseen military requirements, and this action has a well established jurisprudential and separation of power principles, the courts.
The Court is not situated to intervene and change or substitute policy judgments for that of one political party which in this case is the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives and House Speaker Pelosi.
Especially when the issues that the President of the United States, Donald Trump is talking about has to do with matters of national security or foreign affairs and immigration is involved.
House Democrats appear to have become very Anti-American and are doing everything in their power to destroy American from inside.
This article was published by: Donald Cyphers Investigative reporter License# USPA-ID-US/VI-01/29995