Just call it a vital national security issue, which it is. Funding would then be through the military, over which he's Commander In Chief. Much better spent than all the foreign intervention.

So just have Trump tell the military to take land away from private citizens in order to build a wall?

Yeah, what could go wrong with that?

Matter of national security. Say those magic words and they can do just about anything since the National Security Act was passed.

Now, just how long do you think it would take the 9th Circuit to block that order?

DF

They can't block an order from the CIC to the military.

Most of the land is either owned or co-opted by the cartels. If there was ever a reason for imminent domain, this is it.

The law is not written that way.

Better yet, push down into Mexico about ten miles and then build the wall. Military provides security, Mexican banks have money confiscated to build it, illegals are rounded up and do the work.

Better yet, let El Chapo fund it.

I bet if Trump asked for donations to build the wall, he would get a fair amount of money to start it.

Just imagine if somebody introduced Trump to KickStarter.

Let the little fugger work on it, he could lay brick up to about 3 feet if'n he stands on his tippy toes......

Why has there been no private company (fueled by entrepreneurs, investors) stand up and offer to build it if there are enough donations? They could equip the wall with cameras and charge access fees to partially recoup the initial costs. Surely there are other ideas out there waiting to be explored. If Israel can do it, why can't we?

They can't legally block an Executive Order authorized by existing law, either, but that hasn't stopped them yet.

That doesn't read like a line of argument you'd characteristically agree with if it went against your interest in a discussion.

Companies couldnt take or pay for the land.

Just cause they can't doesn't mean they won't...

Sorry bunch. Last judge is a known activist and libtard.

They don't seem to worry about the law, they just decide.

DF

$ Private sector can do it faster, better and cheaper.

Only intelligent post on this thread...

Further, anyone ever tried dealing with reservations? Yeah, sovereign nation and the Tohono o'dham have already made their position pretty clear on the dumb idea of a wall.

Damn near but the one about pushing a 10 mi DMZ SOUTH, into Mex. gets my nod as the one that shines.

Land "owned or co-opted by cartels" ????

......How be we just TAKE that land back, and leave our border Americans the hell alone ....

GTC

The military doesn't wait for some damn judge when they get an order, they just go. The 9th Circus is lib central with a bunch of civilian officials that are more than happy to comply and probably wouldn't have obeyed Trump's executive order in the first place. You order the military to do something like that and it's "yes sir,". Maddog don't answer to a judge...

Exactly.

Odd. The training that I went through when I was in the army made it very plain that I was to disobey any illegal orders.

What training was it that you took in the military, TRH, that leads you think that these would be lawful orders?

Where in the US Constitution does it say that, during a time of invasion, the Commander In Chief's orders to his subordinates in the military chain of command are first to be channeled through the courts in hope of their prior approval?

That's not an illegal order.

Since 1907 the government has owned a 60-ft wide strip along the entire US-Mexican border. It's called the Roosevelt Easement. The Roosevelt Easement ceded the federal government a 60-foot wide easement along of the border with Mexico. This is from a GAO report: "The land where this fencing was built has been publicly owned since 1907 when President Theodore Roosevelt reserved a 60-foot strip along the international boundary with Mexico for the United States to maintain the area free from obstructions as a protection against the smuggling of goods between the United States and Mexico." In effect, the Roosevelt easement provided the federal government with a 60-foot border right-of-way on which it can build the fence.

Thus the federal government has the power to construct a fence along the border to protect the United States. In fact, in 2008 DHS Secretary Chertoff issued a waiver "to bypass environmental reviews to speed construction of fencing along the Mexican border."

The government has already built at least two versions of a border wall on the Tahona O'dham reservation. The reservations were granted to the tribes by the federal government. As far as I can determine, with the exception of the protections and privileges enshrined in our constitution, there is not anything that the federal government giveth that it can't take away.

FWIW, if you haven't already picked up on it, I think the idea of a wall such as the President is proposing is a waste of money, time and manpower. A quote in an article in the Albuquerque Journal over the weekend noted that "the wall will stop everything but people." I don't think that we need to spend $40 billion just to confirm this.

Yeah, no kidding!

That [bleep] Wall makes guys go full-retard.

Wow

Mudhen,

There may perhaps be a 60 foot easement, but how you going to get to that 60 foot easement?

Ponder that, building a wall with no legal easement across private or reservation land, that wall isn't going to happen...

Ever heard or NEPA? Yeah, that wont be a picnic either.

Jeff, stopping the flood of invaders is no small matter. It's a matter of survival. Those who seek our nation's destruction are pulling out all the dirty tricks in the book to prevent it from happening. Any justification, therefore, under which it may legally be accomplished is worth pursuing.

It's called in the law an "easement by necessity." If the only access I have to my drain line is across my next door neighbor's property, I'm permitted to enter on that land for the purpose of maintaining said drain line when required. Same principle should apply here.

Buzz, they have already done it. 25 miles of the southern boundary of the ranch that I used to manage, all private land, abuts the Mexican border. When the last round of border fence building was authorized, the ranch consulted with about all the high-powered legal eagles that they could find. They were told flatly that they could spend a hell of a lot of money, but that the government would prevail through condemnation. However, they were able to negotiate access routes with the feds that minimized adverse impacts on the landscape.

In New Mexico, Arizona and California, enough of the border on the US side is public land that the feds can simply build a highway along the border to provide access to the easement and construct the fence. That is exactly what they have done in several places in Arizona and New Mexico. In Texas, they did have to resort to condemnation in the lower Rio Grande Valley, as some of the fencing was built as far as a mile and a half from the Rio Grande.

NEPA and the ESA don't apply on the border. In fact, the original 25-mile wide corridor that was exempted was later expanded to 100 miles.

Sweet. Those people who's family's have lived there for 200 years can take their $50 per acre and buy a really nice apartment in Chicago. BTDT.

To the OP:
Who pays for the thing?

Why doesn't Trump have Mexico pay for the wall?

That was his first and foremost promise!

He didn't know that he couldn't fire Congress and the Courts, until after the election.

He will but that will take time. He's talked about several ways of raising the money and I've no doubt he'll do it. The initial money is a form of down payment and should be reimbursed over time.

'Easements' are the last fuucking thing the Feds are worried about.

Would it be legal for the military to build the wall; aren't domestic operations by the military illegal (except for the National Guard, in certain situations).

Gotta admit I found this funny as hell!

If the Army was tasked with building the wall, Congress would still have to provide the funds. The President manages a budget, written and passed by Congress, that he has endorsed by way of his signature. He has some latitude to move funds and people around but, in the absence of a declaration of war (which would also require congressional approval), I doubt that he could simply tell the Army to build it and fund it from an existing budget. However, I was a little shocked that DHS could persuade the President and congress to simply waive the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act for DHS's border security operations.

As I inferred in the last post, it has become a circus without a ring master down here on the border.

You old fuggers know everything!

To be honest I did not know this until know, Thanks for informing thy uninformed.

It was an analogy, but you're correct.

Don't they build army bases and such in the US, funded through the military budget?

Sure, but same if the Army is tasked to launch a hundred cruise missiles into some tents in the Middle East. Doesn't mean they wait for funding approval from Congress before they do it.

Should be legal as long as they don't "execute the laws".

Why not just have a bake sale?

During WW II, the US Army built a hiway across Canada to Alaska ans across a good share od Alaska. Don't see how construction of a wall on the Southern border would be any different. Though I also like the idea of the actual wall well inside Mexico, and the ma dueces just inside US territory.

DMZ? Hell teah! You don't hear of many N Koreans getting into S Korea,

I know, let's have a spelling contest.

To take land from thousands of American citizens with compensation and then to build a wall on it?

Oh, it don't get more obviously illegal than that.

I don't know who's more of a danger to America, the Democrats or some of our own.

The border is owned by the United States.

Hard for me to get a handle on how this TRH's blithering, incoherent, and vague unspecific generalities can generate so much continued response.
....has me wondering if the site upgrade sees the annual KOTY awards moved to a new date, and are closer than we thought.

The new funding bill prohibits (thanks to all the GOP p*ssies) any spending for a wall for now.

I suggest that Trump call up the Kentucky and Wisconsin National Guard for border patrol until the P*ssies in Chief of the House and Senate quit fugging around. Pretty sure he can do that, 9th Circuit be damned.

While your support is appreciated, and with ALL due respect for the National Guard
....... don't think you have a clue about what a debacle NG deployment here (again) would almost immediately turn into.

Thanks, but an emphatic NO THANKS.

GTC

Not to worry, I don't think it would ever get anywhere near the deployment stage.

Ryan and McConnell just need a boot up their azzes. Better from Trump than in the 2018 midterms.