There’s A Full-Fledged Fight Over The Wall Going On In The Supreme Court

Kevin Daley

Environmental groups and House Democrats urged the Supreme Court not to disturb a lower court order blocking the reallocation of military funds for border wall projects. The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to put that ruling on hold while litigation continues July 12. Granting that request — called a stay — would give the government an irreversible victory, a coalition of environmentalists led by the Sierra Club warned. “If a stay is granted and wall construction begins, there will be no turning back,” the green groups told the justices in court papers. U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam barred the administration from using $2.5 billion in military funds for border wall construction. The trial court’s injunctions stalled border barrier construction projects in Arizona and New Mexico. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the administration’s request to stay Gilliam’s ruling while litigation continued by a 2-1 vote July 3. The government filed a stay application with the Supreme Court on July 12. Stays are supposed to preserve the status quo among litigants while a lawsuit proceeds through court. If the justices grant the administration’s request, the government can begin construction on several border wall projects the courts may never be able to undo. That is exactly the sort of outcome stays mean to prevent, the Sierra Club said. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) represents the Sierra Club before the high court. “By essentially handing defendants an irrevocable victory, a stay would accomplish the opposite of a stay’s proper purpose: providing interim relief to allow for considered review,” the green groups wrote. The Trump administration asked the high court to rule on its stay application by July 26 because of budget issues. The $2.5 billion in Pentagon funds at issue in this case will not be available for assignment after the fiscal years ends Sept. 30 and the Defense Department needs several months to finalize contracts for each barrier project, according to government lawyers. The House of Representatives filed an amicus (or “friend-of-the-court”) brief supporting the Sierra Club on Friday. House Democrats emphasized the Constitution gives Congress exclusive power to decide how public funds may be spent. “The injury to Congress’s appropriations clause interests harms not only the House, but also the public,” the House’s brief reads. “The appropriations clause is a bulwark of the Constitution’s separation of powers and the history of liberty has largely been the history of observance of such procedural safeguards.”The justices could act on the government’s stay application at any time...MORE