Trump-Nominated Judges Play Role in Wall Money Fight

Federal judges nominated by President Donald Trump are for the most part agreeing to stay injunctions or rule against legal actions challenging the use of emergency powers to get around congressional spending rules, leaving constitutional experts concerned the president is creating a crisis.

Judge Richard Clifton of the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has been shown to stand up to Trump, even though he'd been nominated by Republican President George W. Bush, but he's an exception, reports Politico.

The focus of the oral arguments is now on Clifton's court, which includes two Democratic appointees. The 9th Circuit had agreed to expedite hearings on the lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union for the Sierra Club, but oral arguments still aren't set until early March, leaving a window for Trump to move billions of dollars more toward border wall construction.

The Pentagon was asked on Jan. 15 for money for an estimated 270 miles of wall to be built under "counter-drug" activities, marking twice as many miles that were contracted under the same title in 2019.

Politico reports $7.2 billion in new defense funds are in play, with $3.5 billion under anti-drug activities and $3.7 billion from military construction accounts, marking about $1 billion above the totals last year and five times as much as the $1.376 billion Congress appropriated for new wall construction this year.

"I can't imagine anything more dangerous than a president who says he can take funds appropriated for other purposes and shift them to build the wall along the southern border, claiming it is necessary to satisfy a campaign pledge," Louis Fisher, a constitutional scholar and specialist on separation of power issues for the Congressional Research Service. "I'm surprised that hasn't been brought into the impeachment process. I'm just stunned."

• Air Force: Border Wall Spending Plan Poses Security Threat
• White House Welcomes Court Ruling on Border Wall Spending