American Renaissance

Environmentalists Lose Border-Fence Fight

AR Articles on Immigration Law
The Green Card Crap Shoot (May 2003)
Fade to Brown (May 2003)
A Chronicle of Capitulation (Aug. 2002)
Immigration: The Debate Becomes Interesting (Jul. 1995)
Search AmRen.com for Immigration Law
More news stories on Immigration Law
Howard Fischer, Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), December 20, 2007

A federal judge has tossed out efforts by two environmental groups to void a provision of federal law that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff invoked to build a stretch of border fence in Cochise County.

Judge Ellen Huvelle said there is nothing unconstitutional about a 2005 law that lets Chertoff unilaterally decide that he need not comply with various other federal statutes when constructing barriers and roads on the U.S.-Mexico border.

She said it would be one thing if Congress gave Chertoff the power to unilaterally repeal a law. Instead, Huvelle said, federal lawmakers simply gave him the power, on a case-by-case basis, to waive the requirements.

{snip}

“Each of the 20 laws waived by the secretary on Oct. 26, 2007, retains the same legal force and effect as it had when it was passed by both houses of Congress and presented to the president,” Huvelle wrote.

“The fact that the laws no longer apply to the extent that they otherwise would have with respect to the construction of border barriers and roads within the SPRNCA does not, as plaintiffs argue, transform the waiver into an unconstitutional partial repeal of those laws,” she continued.

Huvelle’s decision is a defeat for Defenders of Wildlife and the Sierra Club, who originally had persuaded the judge to temporarily halt construction work in and around the San Pedro River.

{snip}

But Chertoff, rather than waiting for the case to be heard — and risking an adverse decision — decided instead to use the power Congress gave him in the 2005 Real ID Act to waive the various requirements. That cleared the way for construction to begin.

The two environmental groups then changed tactics and challenged the law, hoping that a legal victory would force the government to tear out anything built in the interim.

Huvelle rejected the contention of the two organizations that the statute is a violation of constitutional requirements for separation of powers.

“The Supreme Court has widely permitted the Congress to delegate its legislative authority to other branches (of government) so long as the delegation is accompanied by sufficient guidance,” she said.

Here, Huvelle said, the law specifically says Chertoff can use his power only if he first determines that a waiver is “necessary to ensure expeditious construction of the barriers and roads” that Congress separately ordered him to construct.

And she said that direction is narrow, dealing only with areas “in the vicinity of the United States border to deter illegal crossings in areas of high illegal entry into the United States.”

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on December 26, 2007)

     Previous story       Next Story       Post a Comment      Search

Comments


Home      Top      Previous story       Next Story      Search

Post a Comment

Commenting guidelines: We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. Statements of fact and well-considered opinion are welcome, but we will not post comments that include obscenities or insults, whether of groups or individuals. We reserve the right to hold our critics to lower standards.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)