Hope Sardella
POL 111 Introduction to Political Science
Instructor: Samra Nasser
11/5/2019 to 12/9/2019
An essential aspect of the study of political science is the power that historical events have on the development of policy. In this report, the author will highlight the National State of Emergency Act (50 U.S.C. §§1601-1651). The first part of this analysis will examine the historical events that were a significant influence on the implementation of the National State of Emergency. Secondly, the essay will review the events, and how and why they changed the the way the executive branch operates. Lastly, we will review the vast capabilities that the National State of Emergency Act gives the executive branch.
To start, there is something to be said about the implications of historical events, and the event’s tendency to hold permanent implications for the formation of policy and government. The number of instances in which history has altered the law, public policy, and the manner in which the executive runs the country, are so frequent you could not count them. Thus, events affect the way the executive branch governs the country by the policies and regulations that ensue from the events themselves. One significant system that has persisted in being a point of contention is the National Emergency Act (N.E.A.) (50 U.S.C. §§1601-1651). It is essential to know that over the past four decades, the United States has been living in what is defined as a “state of emergency”. The late President Harry Truman was the first case example of a president utilizing executive power in the name of protecting the United States in a time of emergency during the Korean War, consequentially this state of emergency remained in effect until the actions legitimization in nineteen seventy-six (Moon, E. (2019)., pg. 1, para. 6). In addition, Moon (2019) confirms that this allowance of executive power was deliberately written in a manner that did broad and loosely constructed with virtually no restraints on the executive branch (2019, pg.1, para. 6). This statement can be interpreted that the National Emergency Act (2019) was developed during a period of time within the Truman (2019) administration, in order to resolve issues in the interest of the country to avoid instances of absolute emergency, but during the framing of the act, it left very serious implications for the possible abuse of the
act.
Although expressions of the executive branch exerting overreach can be traced back to before the United States was founded on a republic. One of the first instances of executive power displayed in a time of emergency was administered by the Continental Congress between seventeen seventy-five and seventeen eighty-one (Relyea, H. 2006, pg. CRS-2, para.1) . Our “Founding Fathers” of the United States framed the operations of our government because they were influenced by the prestigious philosopher and political strategist; John Locke. This renowned early political scientist was an early influence of some of our most revered presidents, Locke understood that the executive branch should have the capability of resolving issues by their own power: if the legislative cannot offer a suitable solution in a timely manner or a grant-able law (Relyea, H. 2006, pg. CRS-1, para. 1). Consequentially, the laws broadly written standard The National Emergency Act holds serious implications for the democracy of the United States. As our government was formed on a republic, the understanding of the executive holding the reigns of peace and war in their hands comes with great responsibility, and with such a large legal loophole available to the executive branch leaves for ample climate for abuses of executive overreach. Goitein, E. (2019) states that if the country continues to leave the legal parameters open for the current administration, there is a possibility a present could refuse to leave office under the National State of Emergency Act, furthermore theirs no reason why the U.S. should continue to allow for the concurrent renewal of old emergency statutes. An important quote: “dangers posed by emergency powers that are written into statute can be mitigated through the simple expedient of changing the law” (Goitein, E. 2019, pg. 5, para. 10.). We can see from this quote that experts understand that as quickly as this policy was written for the president, it can quickly be ruled out.
The following analysis of the National State of Emergency Act has determined the history and development of executive overreach through the states of emergency that the United States is often put under due to threats. Provisions have been made for the executive branch to supersede legislative decisions if legislative decisions cannot be made in a specific time frame that will mitigate the state of emergency.The state of the emergency clause was developed for specific sets of circumstances, but the framers of the code have developed it in such a way that it has been a tool for abuse by the executive house for decades. Revisions of the National Emergency Act are justified in protecting the American government from tyranny and need to be so that the current administration does not continue to use these codes to continue to conduct illegal activities.
References
Relyea, H. (2006). National Emergency Powers. Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library
of Congress. Retrieved from https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a458847.pdf
National State Emergency Act 50 U.S.C. §§1601-1651. Retrieved from
https://policy.defense.gov/portals/11/Documents/hdasa/references/50%20USC%201601-
1651.pdf
Goitein, E. (2019). The Alarming Scope of the President’s Emergency Powers. Retrieved from
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418/
Moon, E. (2019).The United States’ States of Emergencies. Pacific Standard. Retrieved from
https://psmag.com/news/the-united-states-states-of-emergencies
By