Democratic members are again claiming that they can demand access to any federal facilities without approval or even notice to a given agency. We saw previously how Rep. LaMonica McIver stormed an ICE facility and allegedly assaulted an officer. She and others claimed that they had the right of entry without the pre-approval of the agency. Now, after another attempted entry at an ICE facility in Baltimore, an array of Democratic members have sued over their denial. The lawsuit is, in my view, fundamentally flawed, but the members appear to be hoping for another obliging judge. Both sides could be adopting Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s position outside of the ICE facility that “This is BS, plain and simple.”
This week, Van Hollen and several other House and Senate Democrats showed up in Baltimore at the Fallon Federal Building and demanded entry. The group included Sen. Angela Alsobrooks and four members of Maryland’s House delegation: Reps. Glenn Ivey, Johnny Olszewski, Sarah Elfreth and Kweisi Mfume. They then carried out a brief sit-in outside of the door and Van Hollen even objected that the sign said “Welcome,” but they were not welcomed.
As with McIver, the Democrats insisted that they could just show up at any federal office or facility and demand access as a matter of oversight authority. If that were the case, members could barge into any executive office from the White House to the weather service without warning or approval. No court has ever recognized such authority since it would eviscerate the inherent powers of the Executive Branch in our tripartite constitutional system.
The complaint offers a jumbled collection of claims and is poorly conceived and crafted, in my view.
The most relevant seems to be Section 527(a) of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (Public Law 118–47), which states that:
“None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available to the Department of Homeland Security by this Act may be used to prevent…a Member of Congress…from entering, for the purpose of conducting oversight, any facility operated by or for the Department of Homeland Security used to detain or otherwise house aliens.”
The Fiscal Year 2024 Appropriations Act also included a provision that states “the Department of Homeland Security may require that a request be made at least 24 hours in advance of an intent to enter a facility described in subsection (a).”
First, even if constitutional, this provision only applies to facilities that are used to “detain or other house aliens.” The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has contested that status in past protests. Second, the law cannot, and arguably does not, give carte blanche for instant access. An agency can demand notice to allow it to protect the security and safety of personnel and visitors. DHS can argue that it is not denying entrance so long as they are given notice in advance.
The issue is not the right to inspect but the right to instant access. Of course, the members filed in Baltimore and may hope for a judge who is more accommodating than scrutinizing on authority.
The members could argue that oversight, at times, requires inspections without prior warning to prevent the loss of evidence or agency efforts to conceal poor conditions. However, if the Congress can force such immediate access to ICE facilities, it could presumably demand such access on any federal property. All agencies are subject to the oversight of one or more congressional committees. That sweeping authority runs against the grain of Article II and can create dangerous and obstructive elements for federal officials.
Courts are tasked with reading laws narrowly to avoid such constitutional questions. The question is what constitutes “preventing” under the law. The Administration is not denying access, just requiring advance notice.
This sets up a conflict between Article I and Article II authority. The Administration will argue that immediate and unrestricted access to any ICE facility intrudes on the ability to exercise executive authority. In my view, there must be some area for reasonable limitations on the exercise of oversight authority. What is absolutely clear is that members cannot seek, as did Rep. McIver to force their way into facilties.
Here is the lawsuit: Neguse v. ICE
Does the government have a right to be safe and secure in its papers from the arbitrary acts of the citizens?
Talking about the government having “rights” is a bit of a misnomer. Individual people have rights, the government and government agencies have authority or authorization. So . . . if you would reframe your question to use the proper terminology, perhaps it could be answered.
The president has the executive power.
Period.
There are a growing number of citizens that are truly enjoying watching further justifications for not putting ANY Democrat into any elected office. The lawfare has turned into a multi-ringed clown circus, and is fraught with incompetents throughout. Hardly a smidgen of common sense can be found anywhere within that party.
Republicans could sit in on deliberations of the Supreme Court.
Why, it’s not like there is ever any surprise from the leftists. I guess we could finally get some insight as to why so many of our so-called “conservative” justices sell us out, but is that really a mystery in the DC swamp?
Oversight?
The Supreme Court is sworn to support the Constitution.
The Constitution, the whole Constitution, and nothing but the Constitution.
It does not.
It does not act licitly or constitutionally and is subject to impeachment, which must be brought to bear.
Please cite for Social Security or Medicare in the Constitution.
No there; not anywhere in there.
Rabble:
“None of the funds appropriated ,,, by this Act may be used to prevent…a Member of Congress…from entering ,,, any facility operated by the Department of Homeland Security ,,, .”
And therein still lies the flaw with their plan. DHS isn’t using this money to prevent Congress from entering. They are following their own bylaws regarding forced and unauthorized entry.
i.e. GTFO with your lies.
*. Presumably some of it is boiler plate language covering many kinds of DHS/ICE facilities?
I love headlines
“Pam Bondi Rewrites DOJ Funding Rules to Benefit White People”
Thank you MAGA
Hahahahahahaha oh man you’re a freaking riot. Do you really get paid per comment here? What is it, five cents? Ten cents? Whatever it is, it’s waaaaay too much given the quality of the crap that you write.
“I love headlines
“Pam Bondi Rewrites DOJ Funding Rules to Benefit White People”
Thank you MAGA”
When you’ve been given preferential treatment for decades, as so many minority groups have, to suddenly be treated as equals does in fact seem like discrimination. But I wouldn’t expect someone of your obviously inferior intellect to be able to understand any of that.
“That’s bait.”
Mad Max: Fury Road
-Rabble
OT
“US fertility rate reaches new low in 2024.”
– Fox News
______________
Men persist.
Women make the men who persist…or not.
Women have one essential and crucial duty…to make men…and women to make more men.
Nations don’t need women voters; nations need women procreators.
Women voters have caused illegal immigration and population replacement.
Women voters will cause the death of the nation.
Is a seed a tree’s way of making more trees, or is a tree a seed’s way of making more seeds?
The seed of course.
Americans are vanishing from America.
Take a look out your window.
Americans are being replaced and not by Americans.
The Founders secured the blessings of liberty to THEMSELVES and their POSTERITY.
Or not.
For good or ill, the image of LaMonica McIver (D-NJ) assaulting federal agents with her elbows, fists, and belly, will forever be associated in the American mind with the Dems’ attempts to gain access to these places.
Everyone enjoy the spaz below making a big funny. Looks to me like she’s capable of working, let’s check her Medicaid status.
I certainly enjoyed it
Me too, most enjoyable
Spastic no-life freak.
I agree.
Very enjoyable
Perhaps the most enjoyable thing here today
Most enjoyable.
Loved it
We all agree it was very enjoyable
Couldn’t agree more
Extremely enjoyable
Yes it was very funny and most enjoyable
I just wish there were more enjoyable comments like that
Yes indeed, most enjoyable
This is clearly some demented fool responding to his own comments
Something should be done about it !!!
Really .
What makes you think it is the same person responding to his own posts
The posts all have different names
The idiots who are regulars here all post under a bunch of fake names.
There are no more than half a dozen who actually post regularly. They just use different names to respond to themselves.
Really ???
That is hard to believe.
Why would they do that.
Because they are mentally ill cult members who do not have meaningful lives outside of this miserable excuse for a blog.
I see.
So that would explain why most of the posts are simply congratulating themselves on how “well said” the comments are.
That’s right.
It is the same person making a comment, and then congratulating himself using a different name.
Now I understand.
So basically this blog is just a Mutual Masturbation Society where demented cult members come to play with themselves thinking that it is the real thing.
That’s right
It is really pathetic
Another Epstein Scandal diversionary post that echoes the daily affirmation talking points from MAGA media, with the usual attack against Democrats, and that is light on the law and heavy on propaganda. Why shouldn’t our legal representatives be allowed at any time to inspect any facility constructed with taxpayer money and which uses taxpayer funds to pay operating costs? The following names, with the “I agree” comment all use the same icon: Anonymous, Fred, Mary, Joe, Michael, John, Robert and Jane.
Oh look another GIGI diversionary post. Blah blah blah MAGA MAGA MAGA. Go away you freak.
Because they have no constitutional right to enter any gov. facility they want. Easy right?
“Why Shouldn’t”
That is not the uestion.
The issue is what can congressmen do legally and constitutionally.
uestions of “Should” are decided by passing laws and those laws being upheld as constitutional by the courts.
As to the issue of “should” – congress should be able to conduct oversight – and constitutionally can.
The issue is HOW ?
I mostly do not care – except that whatever is decided applies the same for all accross all administrations.
If democrat congressmen think it is politically valuable to them to tour ICE fascilities as they please – I think the administration should let them go for it and make sure that any disruption they cause makes the nightly news.
This is a losing issue for democrats – especially if they win in the courts.
Regardless I support broad congressional oversight. Even if it is disruptive. Possibly especially if it is disruptive.
At the same time – I do not see this as a winning issue for democrats.
The courts will sort this out. No one will be happy with what they decide.
And no matter what the outcome it will not matter.
It’s yet another Dimocrat Fool’s Errand
Tilting at windmills in more ways than one.
@Res Ipsa
Though I appreciate the free spirit here, seeing anonymous posters responding to themselves is getting a wee bit old. Is it at all possible to have some sort of registration process beyond WordPress?
“[James and] Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech.
– Professor Turley
What makes you think that anonymous posters respond to themselves ??
I see no evidence of that.
I agree.
No evidence of self responders
I think James may be a bit paranoid regarding anonymous posters.
I agree.
There is very little self responding here
What would be the point of responding to your own posts??
I agree that James is a little paranoid.
Definitely no evidence of anonymous self responders here
There is a great deal of paranoia here about anonymous posters responding to themselves
Paranoia is a typical trait of cult members.
I agree cult members always display very high levels of paranoia
They seem to be obsessed with the idea that anonymous posters respond to their own comments to make it seem like there are many more of them than there actually are.
Paranoia indeed !!!
Impertinent impudence as violation of the The Turley Blog Civility Rule.
BAN FOR LIFE!
James,
Just do what I do, JSP.
What if the funds were appropriated under another Act? Like next year’s appropriations act?
OT;
TACO strikes again. Trump backed away from his 50% tariff on copper. He’s already backing away from Brazilian tariffs by excluding most Brazilian exports. Trump Always Chickens out.
Let’s ask your Iranian mullah buddies how the TACO thing worked out for them. I’ll call them now. Oh, there seems to be a fault on the line. Hmm.
You are an under informed, malcontent troll.m You know nothing.
“Trump [negotiated] his 50% tariff on copper, ably demonstrating his ‘Trump: The Art of the Deal.'”
– A Ninny
The fact that you refuse to identify yourself, negates anything you have to say.
ROFL
Numerous trade deals have been made recently – all uite favorable to the US.
The TACO thing is just another left wing idiocy confusing misperception with reality.
While Trump’s threat was to all nations – many of the delays are because the US has only so many negotiators, and some of the negotiations like those with the EU took a while, delaying negotiations with lessor countries such as Brazil
In the larger scheme of things – most of the nations we have not negotiated new deals with yet – do not matter all that much.
It is important that the US has fair trade with the EU, UK, CN, JP.
Protectionism by less developed countries like Brazil is not that important.
We the People, the true government, formed a self-governing country from get go. In our REPUBLIC each and everyone of us has right to access any federal or other facility. Issue has nothing to do with political party involved. FDR lawyer and biggest thug who ever existed, ruined millions of American lives. including my own. The strawman straw-woman theft of my innate sovereignty must end forever and all usufruct fees paid to each and every one of us. Used me as chattel, denied right to complete my God given mission to enable amputees’ to regenerate their limbs.
Brit Admiralty law is void and all who have used it on me must be arrested and hung for blatant treason. What its did to my bones is proof of Satanism.
American Murder Association destroyed my bones with levothyroxine, proven world wide to destroy bone density 30 years ago, when they knew all i needed was vitamin D-3.
I billed your Pope $7.7 Trillion in January, payable only in silver and gold
Margarete Pullen, Genetic Physicist and 20 Generations American, 1600 prior to our necessitated for the entire planet Revolutionary War. People came from all over the globe then to fight against the Treaty of Verona families, Satanists, eugenicist, psychopaths’, i.e. insane two legged talking creatures, sub-mankind, inhumane.
The original 13th Amendment is valid and must be enforced.
Let us pass Constitutional Law, Amendment against cruelty, premediated murderers. Confiscate all their financial holdings and put them behind bars in zoos!
This will stop the BS in Congress fast.
Billionaires do not belong in charge of our country, nor any other country.
Everything our nations founders warned of, if a central bank got control, has occurred. Jefferson warned of the lawyers, Shakespeare is correct.
We have free energy via mother earth, as N.T. proved decades ago.
Stop the absurdity.
“We the White People…”
____________________________
Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1798, 1802
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free WHITE PERSON, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof….
I ignore most anonymous posters and wish they’d convert to pseudonymous, but this one today is making very good points regarding a1 v. a2 and many good posters are responding ad hominem.
Anyway, my criticism today is the “judge who” construction in this ungrammatical phrase: “a judge who more accommodating that scrutinizing on authority.” Even assuming the two obvious corrections of “who” to “who’s” and “that” to “than”, this tortures English. Maybe it should also say accommodating “to” and scrutinizing “of”.
Mostly this construction seems to imply that there are judges who this or judges who that, but don’t we want judges to follow the law in a more or less consistent fashion? Having lots of “judge who’s” seems like they’d always be carrying lots of their own baggage.
I began thinking of the Victor Borges video Estovir posted and how he said English always has two ways to say something because it’s rooted in both Romance & Germanic languages. My conclusion is that Prof. Turley shows his Italian heritage by this phrase.
@Creekan
Something I say all the time. Make a moniker with an anonymous email address. The ‘good’ anonymous posters don’t seem to realize all of their data that is visible, in whatever that capacity, is visible regardless. The trolling, and trolls responding to themselves, is really getting old.
I’ve participated in online fora since the 1980s. Isn’t it a general rule that trolls always exist and attempts at moderation always lead to censorship?
I know when I click Reply that WordPress knows the IP address of the device I’m using and any email address I provide, and anyone who hacks into WordPress knows, and I suppose any court that subpoenas WordPress knows. But to an ordinary visitor here, my handle and what I type is all that’s “visible”, right?
*. I skipped it.
Once again laws with so, so, many ambiguities and lack of specifics passed with a broad stroke, (We Did Something See!). The legislative process in America is (I don’t know a good way to describe Weak, Broken, Lazy, or just dumb). Using the example of today’s topic highlights a slip shod process; it gives rights but does not address what that right entails other than having access, leaving the door wide open for the judiciary to adjudicate, which could render the primary intent null and void. So, my question would be, what rights do they have other than I’m here let me in? Do they have the right to wonder about without escort, to break hard tack with a detainee and on and on, you see the picture? The Courts will judge!
George W
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
Courts can somehow “interpret” (i.e. amend) the Constitution to mean executive power is vested in a Congress when Article 2 clearly states that executive power is vested in a president, but courts cannot possibly “interpret” the law to deny illegal alien criminals the power to confer U.S. citizenship on their illegal alien babies, which they illegally crossed the border to bear in the U.S. to circumvent immigration law?
Of course, only the president possesses executive power, and the courts must “interpret” that crime does not pay and that no benefit may accrue to an illegal alien criminal border crosser or the illegal alien criminal border crosser fetus inside of her, both of whom are subject to the jurisdiction of their country of origin.
“THE EXECUTIVE POWER, THE WHOLE EXECUTIVE POWER, AND NOTHING BUT THE EXECUTIVE POWER, SO HELP YOU GOD!”
The president possesses all executive power; Congress possesses no executive power.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 2, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 1, Section 1
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
OT
Karoline Leavitt just came on the TV with more breaking news. I can’t watch it. I can’t take it. I can’t assimilate all this WINNING!
It’s all WINNING, all the time. I’m overwhelmed. I had to turn it off.
And again I was able to read the post prior to anyone commenting. How nice it was. Now that I have been able to reread and see the comments I am brough back to my comment of yesterday. Why do the same people come and create nasty back and forth.
I respect the right to freedom of speech. However there is a point where I turn people off. Perhaps Mr. Turley would consider adding an ignore or mute button to the site. It is still free speech, just giving the reader, or listener the right to turn away.
Long
If you haven’t noticed. The left hates anyone who doesn’t think their way.
There is only one individual who is creating the nasty discourse and that’s the “Anonymous” who constantly heckles others and engages in ad hominem attacks for the sole purpose of discouraging others from engaging in reasonable discussions. That particular “Anonymous” seems to be on the blog all day just to heckle and harrass others.
You’re not the victim here Georgie, you’re the serial liar and prevaricator who pollutes this blog with pages and pages of irrelevant and illogical walls of text. You attack your betters here every single day. If you can’t be bothered to define perjury for us, or to show the Maxwell testimony that you lied about earlier, why should anyone listen to anything you have to say? You’re just a liar.
Thanks for proving my point. Anonymous.
Indeed, I will continue to call you out on your serial lying and trolling. Have a nice day sweetcheeks!!!