[Annotated] Will the courts let Donald Trump build his wall?

Even if they do, this will not fix what ails the border^[각주:1]

A few hours after Donald Trump tweeted about "the attempted Invasion of Illegals, through large Caravans, into our Country," Carmen sat in a church office in suburban Maryland, quietly sobbing. Five years ago she and her son, who was then three, fled from El Salvador and her violent husband. "It's difficult to leave your country," she says. "You have your family and your friends. Your whole life is rooted there. But when it comes to your child's safety, I don't think there is anything a mother wouldn't do." They crossed Guatemala, Mexico and the Rio Grande before presenting themselves to immigration cops in^[각주:2] New Mexico. After being detained^[각주:3], she applied for asylum^[각주:4], and was released to await^[각주:5] a hearing^[각주:6]. She is still waiting. 

If America has a border crisis, it comes not from any sort of invasion - in the year to September 2018^[각주:7], the authorities caught 396,579 people trying to cross the southern border, fewer than half as many as in 2007 - but from people like Carmen and her son: families fleeing troubled states in^[각주:8] central America to seek asylum^[각주:9]. Mr Trump's steel-bollard fencing^[각주:10], even if it survives a legal assault^[각주:11], will do nothing to fix that problem. 

Mr Trump wants to add 234 miles of fencing to the roughly 700 that already exist along America's border with Mexico. He has identified four sources to pay for it. Congress gave $1.375bn. He also plans to take $601m from the Treasury Department's asset-forfeiture^[각주:12] funds and $2.5bn from the Defence Department's anti-drug fund. His administration argues that declaring a national emergency, which he did on February 15th, gives him access to $3.6bn appropriated military-construction projects. Not everyone agrees. 

Wall law

Public Citizen, an advocacy group^[각주:13], filed suit in a federal court hours after^[각주:14] Mr Trump's declaration, on behalf of an environmental group^[각주:15] as well as three landowners in^[각주:16] Texas who believe they will face "an imminent invasion of their privacy and the quiet enjoyment of their land^[각주:17]" during and after construction of the wall. They argue that historically low immigration numbers mean that no national emergency exists at the southern border. Mr Trump seemed to acknowledge that during a press conference^[각주:18], saying: "I didn't need to do this, but I'd rather do it much faster." They also argue that the statute^[각주:19] Mr Trump has cited to let him use the $3.6bn^[각주:20] does not apply, because the border wall is neither a military-construction project nor essential to support the mission of the armed forces. 

Another suit, filed the next day in the same court by three environmental groups, centres on^[각주:21] the harm to wildlife^[각주:22] and other "far-reaching environmental impacts^[각주:23]" that building a wall could cause. The plaintiffs^[각주:24] acknowledge that the National Emergencies Act of 1976 fails to define "emergency". But, they contend^[각주:25], "common usage" of the term involves "elements of suddenness^[각주:26] and surprise" that "require an urgent response". Not only did Mr Trump say he did not need to declare an emergency^[각주:27], he bandied the idea around for weeks before^[각주:28] the declaration as a strategy to circumvent Congress if^[각주:29] his budget negotiations failed. 

On February 18th a group of 16 states sued Mr Trump in a federal court in San Francisco. They argue that his declaration evinces^[각주:30] a "flagrant^[각주:31] disregard of^[각주:32] fundamental separation of powers principles^[각주:33] engrained in the United State constitution^[각주:34]" - specifically the Appropriations Clause in Article I, which states that the government can spend only money provided by Congress. The states also argue that their National Guard units stand to lose millions in^[각주:35] federal funding when the administration reallocates it to the wall^[각주:36]. 

At least one of these cases will probably end up before the Supreme Court, where precedent cuts both ways^[각주:37]. On the one hand^[각주:38], courts typically defer to the president^[각주:39] on questions of national security. On the other, the court clipped then-president Harry Truman's wings in^[각주:40] Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company v Sawyer, a ruling of^[각주:41] 1952 striking down his attempt to^[각주:42] seize American steel mills^[각주:43]. In a concurring opinion that^[각주:44] has come to define the limits of executive authority, Justice Robert Jackson wrote that when a president "takes measures^[각주:45] incompatible with^[각주:46] the expressed or implied will of Congress", his power "is at its lowest ebb^[각주:47]". Mr Trump, who is snatching money for a project that^[각주:48] Congress largely declined to fund, would seem to be in that territory. 

A poisoned chalice^[각주:49] 

Yet even if courts invalidate Mr Trump's emergency declaration^[각주:50], he is likely to have almost $4.5bn to spend on a project of dubious^[각주:51] practical utility^[각주:52]. Christopher Wilson, of the Wilson Centre's Mexico Institute, believes the discussion over where to erect new fencing "would be a rational conversation... 20 years ago, before we had 700 miles of fencing along the border. Now we're talking about where to put a 30-foot fence on top of a 1,000-foot mountain." 

Walls work best, argues Doris Meissner of the Migration Policy Institute, a think-tank, "where urban areas touch other urban areas^[각주:53]". El Paso and Juarez, for example, form a single binational^[각주:54] conurbation^[각주:55] bisected by^[각주:56] the Rio Grande. In sparsely^[각주:57] populated areas^[각주:58], cameras and remote sensors are sufficient for picking up suspicious movements^[각주:59]; in cities people can slip across borders more easily^[각주:60]. 

Dee Margo, El Paso's mayor, says that he would favour spending not on a wall, but on more staff to process the tens of thousands of people, cars and lorries that cross the border daily. He is not alone. All but one member of Congress from a border district is a Democrat, and all^[각주:61], including the lone Republican, oppose Mr Trump's wall. Fear-mongering about^[각주:62] violent immigrants notwithstanding^[각주:63], 22 of the 23 border counties are safer than similarly sized counties elsewhere^[각주:64]. 

If the goal is to stanch the flow of drugs coming from^[각주:65] Mexico, money would be better spent improving scanning facilities and infrastructure at ports of entry^[각주:66], where most of them arrive hidden in vehicles. Better data analytics would improve risk-screening for people^[각주:67] and vehicles crossing. But not all new infrastructure has to be high-tech: Mr Wilson praises dogs for^[각주:68] their ability to sniff out drugs^[각주:69]. The spending bill^[각주:70] includes $776m for such measures, which is welcome, but only a seventh of what Mr Trump wants to spend on his wall. 

The bill also includes funds for another 75 immigration judges. That is also welcome but probably insufficient. Hiring^[각주:71] tends to lag behind funding^[각주:72]. In the last fiscal year^[각주:73] Congress funded 484 immigration judges, but at year's end just 395 were working. And as of September there was a backlog of 319,000^[각주:74] pending asylum cases^[각주:75]. Between 2010 and 2017 the number of asylum claims filed annually rose from 28,000 to 143,000, with many coming from Venezuela, Guatemala and El Salvador. Political instability and violence in Central America pushes people north. But some are also drawn by America's inefficient asylum system, which lets people stay and work while their claims are assessed^[각주:76]. 

The real problem is structural. America's immigration-enforcement system was designed to cope with the sort of^[각주:77] migration that historically came from Mexico - single men looking for work, eager to dodge immigration police^[각주:78]. It is not suited to today's flow^[각주:79], which consists largely of families and children eager to present themselves to police so they can claim asylum. Sadly, ambitious immigration reform has eluded Washington^[각주:80] for years^[각주:81], and this administration is unlikely to take up that poisoned chalice^[각주:82]. 

Instead, it is poised to spend billions on a project that^[각주:83] will let Mr Trump fulfil a campaign promise^[각주:84] while changing little along the border. That money would be better spent on technology at ports of entry - and on improving America's asylum system so that it draws fewer people northward, and leaves fewer people, like Carmen and her son, in limbo for so long^[각주:85]. 

1. ail ; …을 괴롭히다, 고민하게 하다, 번거롭게 하다. ;; [VERB] If something ails a group or area of activity, it is a problem or source of trouble for that group or for people involved in that activity. ;; 미국∙영국 [eɪl] [본문으로]
2. present oneself ; 자진 출두하다 [본문으로]
3. detain ; 1. [타동사] (경찰서·교도소 ·병원 등에) 구금[억류]하다 ;; 2. [타동사] (격식) (어디에 가지 못하게) 붙들다, 지체하게 하다 ; 참조 detention ;; [VERB] When people such as the police detain someone, they keep them in a place under their control. [본문으로]
4. apply for asylum ; 망명을 신청하다 [본문으로]
5. await ; (격식) 1. [타동사] (…을) 기다리다 [본문으로]
6. hearing ; 2. [C] 공판, 심리, 공청회 ;; 3. [sing.] 해명[설명]할 기회 [본문으로]
7. in the year to ; ~(년, 월, 일) 까지 [본문으로]
8. flee ; [타동사] <사람·장소에서> 달아나다, 도망치다; 피신[피난]하다; <유혹을> 피하다; <나라 등을> 버리다 [본문으로]
9. seek asylum ; 망명을 요청하다 ;; (망명하여) 보호를 청하다 [본문으로]
10. bollard ; 1. (英) (도로의) 차량 진입 방지용 말뚝 ;; 2. (배나 부둣가의) 배의 밧줄을 매는 말뚝, 계선주 ;; [NOUN] Bollards are short thick concrete posts that are used to prevent cars from going on to someone's land or on to part of a road. [본문으로]
11. survive ; 3. <고뇌·역경 등을> 견디다, 헤어나다 [본문으로]
12. asset forfeiture ; Asset forfeiture or asset seizure is a form of confiscation of assets by the state. In the United States, it is a type of criminal justice financial obligation. It typically applies to the alleged proceeds or instruments of crime. This applies, but is not limited, to terrorist activities, drug related crimes, and other criminal and even civil offenses. Some jurisdictions specifically use the term "confiscation" instead of forfeiture. The alleged purpose of asset forfeiture is to disrupt criminal activity by confiscating assets that potentially could have been beneficial to the individual or organization. [본문으로]
13. advocacy group ; (美) 변호 단체 ; 참조 interest group, pressure group [본문으로]
14. file (a) suit (against) ; 소송하다, 고소하다 [본문으로]
15. environmental group ; [명사] 환경 보호 단체 [본문으로]
16. landowner ; [명사] (특히 많은 땅을 가진) 토지 소유자, 지주 ;; [NOUN] A landowner is a person who owns land, especially a large amount of land. [본문으로]
17. quiet enjoyment ; 향유 [본문으로]
18. press conference (특히 英) (美 주로 ˈnews conference) ;; 기자 회견 ;; [NOUN] A press conference is a meeting held by a famous or important person in which they answer journalists' questions. [본문으로]
19. statute ; [UC/] 1. [법] 성문율(成文律); 법령, 법규(law) ;; 2. (국제법) (조약 등의) 부속 문서 ;; 3. 규칙, 정관(定款) ((of)) ;; [NOUN] A statute is a rule or law which has been made by a government or other organization and formally written down. ;; 미국∙영국 [ˈstætʃuːt] [본문으로]
20. cite ; 2. [타동사] 인용하다 ; 유의어 quote [본문으로]
21. center ; [자동사] 중심(점)에 있다 ; 집중하다(★ 전치사는 보통 on이 쓰이지만, (구어)에서는 round, around, about, in, at도 쓰인다). [본문으로]
22. harm ; [명사] (유형무형의) 해(opp. good), 손해(damage), 손상, 상해(injury, hurt). [본문으로]
23. far-reaching ; (효과·영향 따위가) 멀리까지 미치는, 광범위한, 장래에까지 미치는; (계획 따위가) 원대한, 널리 응용할 수 있는. ;; [ADJ] If you describe actions, events, or changes as far-reaching, you mean that they have a very great influence and affect a great number of things. [본문으로]
24. plaintiff (英 드물게 com·plain·ant) ;; (법률) (민사 소송의) 원고, 고소인 ; 참조 defendant ;; [NOUN] A plaintiff is a person who brings a legal case against someone in a court of law. [본문으로]
25. contend ; [타동사] 1. (격식) (특히 언쟁 중에) 주장하다 ; 유의어 maintain ;; [VERB] If you have to contend with a problem or difficulty, you have to deal with it or overcome it. [본문으로]
26. suddenness ; [U] 돌연함, 갑작스러움; 급격함 [본문으로]
27. declare[proclaim] an emergency ; 비상 사태를 선포하다. [본문으로]
28. bandy ; [타동사] (공 따위를) 치고받다, (타격·언쟁 따위를) 주고받다; (이야기를) 퍼뜨리다; (나쁜 소문을) 퍼뜨리다 ;; [VERB] If you bandy words with someone, you argue with them. [본문으로]
29. circumvent ; (격식) 1. [타동사] (어려움이나 법 등을) 피하다[면하다] ;; 2. [타동사] (길을 막고 있는 것을) 피해 가다[둘러 가다] ;; [VERB] If someone circumvents a rule or restriction, they avoid having to obey the rule or restriction, in a clever and perhaps dishonest way. [본문으로]
30. evince ; [타동사][VN] (격식) (감정·특질을) 분명히 밝히다[피력하다] ;; [VERB] If someone or something evinces a particular feeling or quality, they show that feeling or quality, often indirectly. ;; 미국∙영국 [ɪˈvɪns] [본문으로]
31. flagrant ; [형용사] 행동이 노골적인, 명백한 ; 유의어 blatant ;; [ADJ] You can use flagrant to describe an action, situation, or someone's behaviour that you find extremely bad or shocking in a very obvious way. ;; 미국∙영국 [ˈfleɪɡrənt] [본문으로]
32. disregard ; [U]무시, 경시(neglect), 무관심(indifference) ;; [VERB] If you disregard something, you ignore it or do not take account of it. [본문으로]
33. power principle ; [명사] 세력 원리(국제간의 경쟁이나 교섭에서는 세력이 강한 나라가 약한 나라에 대해서 우위에 선다고 하는 원리) [본문으로]
34. engrain ; 2. 〔습관·성질 따위〕를 깊이 심어 주다[in]. (또는 ingrain) [본문으로]
35. stand to lose sth ; ~를 잃을 처지에 있다 [본문으로]
36. reallocate ; [타동사][VN] ~ sth (to sb/sth) 재분배하다 ; 유의어 redistribute ;; [VERB] When organizations reallocate money or resources, they decide to change the way they spend the money or use the resources. [본문으로]
37. cut both[two] ways ; (행동·주장 등이) 두 가지 상반된 효과[결과]가 있다 ;; (토론 따위가) 양쪽에 통하다, 선으로나 악으로나 다 쓰이다 ;; have an effect both for and against somebody/something [본문으로]
38. on the one hand ; 한편으로는 [본문으로]
39. defer to sb/sth ; ~을 좇다[따르다] ;; to accept somebody's opinion or do what they suggest because you respect them [본문으로]
40. clip sb's wings ; ~의 날개를 꺾다(누구의 자유나 권력을 제한한다는 뜻) ;; 말꼬리를 흐리다; …을 속박하다; 10대의 특권을 제한하거나 없애다(집에서 기르기 위해 날개를 잘라낸 새나 가금에 비유하여) ;; limit somebody's freedom or power [본문으로]
41. ruling ; (pl. rulings [-z]) [U] 1. 지배, 통치; [C]〈법률〉 판결, 판례, 재정; 결정. ;; [NOUN] A ruling is an official decision made by a judge or court. [본문으로]
42. strike down ; to reject something; to make something no longer valid [본문으로]
43. 1952 steel strike ; The 1952 steel strike was a strike by the United Steelworkers of America against U.S. Steel and nine other steelmakers. The strike was scheduled to begin on April 9, 1952, but President Harry S Truman nationalized the American steel industry hours before the workers walked out. The steel companies sued to regain control of their facilities. On June 2, 1952, in a landmark decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), that the president lacked the authority to seize the steel mills. The Steelworkers struck to win a wage increase. The strike lasted 53 days, and ended on July 24, 1952, on essentially the same terms the union had proposed four months earlier [본문으로]
44. concurring opinion ; (법률) 보충 의견, 동의 의견: 상소(上訴) 법원에서, 판결에 즈음해서 다른 판사가 내린 결론에는 동의하나 그 결론에 이르는 이유 근거를 달리하거나, 그 사건에 대해 다른 견해를 지닌 판사의 의견. [본문으로]
45. take[adopt, use] measures ;; 조치를 취하다 ;; 대책을 강구하다 [본문으로]
46. incompatible with ; …와 맞지 않는. [본문으로]
47. ebb ; 2. 줄어들기, 감퇴(減退), 쇠퇴(衰退)(decline) ; 쇠퇴기(stage of decline). [본문으로]
48. snatch ; 1. …을 잡아[낚아]채다, 움켜잡다[쥐다], 강탈하다, 붙잡다 ( … from, out of ; … away, off, up).⇨ take. ;; [VERB] If you snatch something or snatch at something, you take it or pull it away quickly. [본문으로]
49. chalice ; [명사] (미사 때 포도주를 담는) 성배 ;; [NOUN] A chalice is a large gold or silver cup with a stem. Chalices are used to hold wine in the Christian service of Holy Communion.;; 미국∙영국 [ˈtʃælɪs] [본문으로]
50. invalidate ; 무효로 만들다; …의 법적 효력을 없게 하다 ;; [VERB] To invalidate something such as an argument, conclusion, or result means to prove that it is wrong or cause it to be wrong. [본문으로]
51. dubious ; 2. (못마땅함) 수상쩍은 ; 유의어 suspicious ;; [ADJ] If you describe something as dubious, you mean that you do not consider it to be completely honest, safe, or reliable. ;; 미국식 [ˈduː-] 영국식 [ˈdjuːbiəs] [본문으로]
52. practical utility ; 실용 가치, 실용성 [본문으로]
53. touch ; 3-d. 인접하다, …와 경계를 접하다 [본문으로]
54. binational ; [형용사] 이국(二國)의, 두 국적의 [본문으로]
55. conurbation ; [명사] (흔히 큰 도시 주변의) 광역 도시권 ;; [NOUN] A conurbation consists of a large city together with the smaller towns around it. ;; 미국식 [ˌkɑːnɜːrˈb-] 영국식 [ˌkɒnɜːˈbeɪʃn] [본문으로]
56. bisect ; [타동사][VN] (전문 용어) 2등분[양분]하다 ;; [VERB] If something long and thin bisects an area or line, it divides the area or line in half. ;; 미국∙영국 [baɪˈsekt] [본문으로]
57. sparsely ; [부사] 드문드문, 성기게 [본문으로]
58. populated areas ; 거주 지역 [본문으로]
59. pick up ; 2. ~을 알아보다[알아채다] [본문으로]
60. slip across the border ; 국경을 몰래 넘다 [본문으로]
61. and all l; 1.also ; included ;; 2.too ; as well [본문으로]
62. fear-mongering ; 위험한 요소 및 이슈를 의도적으로 과장시켜서 소문을 퍼트리고 불필요한 두려움을 일으키는 전술 ; 유의어 scaremongering [본문으로]
63. notwithstanding ; [전치사] [관련된 명사 뒤에 쓰이기도 함] (격식) …에도 불구하고 ;; [PREP] If something is true notwithstanding something else, it is true in spite of that other thing. [본문으로]
64. sized ; [종종 복합어로] …사이즈의, 크기가 …인, …형의. [본문으로]
65. stanch ; 2. 억제하다, 없애다 ;; [VERB] to stem the flow of (a liquid, esp blood) or (of a liquid) to stop flowing [본문으로]
66. ports of entry ; 통관항, 관세 수속항, 입항지, 입국항 [본문으로]
67. rick screening ; 위험도 검사 [본문으로]
68. praise ; 1. [타동사] ~ sb/sth (for sth) | ~ sb/sth (as sth) 칭찬하다 ; 유의어 compliment ;; [VERB] If you praise someone or something, you express approval for their achievements or qualities. [본문으로]
69. sniff sb/sth out ; 1. 냄새[후각]로 ~을 알아[찾아]내다 ;; 2. ~을 냄새 맡다[알아내다] ;; 1.to find somebody/something by smelling ;; 2.to find information about somebody/something [본문으로]
70. spending bill ; 지출법안 [본문으로]
71. hiring ; [형용사, 명사] [U]고용(의); 임대차(의) [본문으로]
72. lag[fall] behind ; 뒤(처)지다 [본문으로]
73. A fiscal year (or financial year, or sometimes budget year) is the period used by governments for accounting and budget purposes, which varies between countries. It is also used for financial reporting by business and other organizations. Laws in many jurisdictions require company financial reports to be prepared and published on an annual basis, but generally do not require the reporting period to align with the calendar year (1 January to 31 December). Taxation laws generally require accounting records to be maintained and taxes calculated on an annual basis, which usually corresponds to the fiscal year used for government purposes. The calculation of tax on an annual basis is especially relevant for direct taxation, such as income tax. Many annual government fees—such as Council rates, licence fees, etc.—are also levied on a fiscal year basis, while others are charged on an anniversary basis. [본문으로]
74. backlog ; [명사] 밀린 일 ;; [NOUN] A backlog is a number of things which have not yet been done but which need to be done. [본문으로]
75. pending ; (격식) 1. 미결[미정]인, 계류 중인 ;; 2. 곧 있을, 임박한 ; 유의어 imminent ;; [ADJ] If something such as a legal procedure is pending, it is waiting to be dealt with or settled. [본문으로]
76. assess ; 3. …의 가치[중요성, 성질 따위]를 검토 평가하다. ;; [VERB] When you assess a person, thing, or situation, you consider them in order to make a judgment about them. [본문으로]
77. cope with ; [동사] …에 대처[대응]하다; …에 대항하다. ; 유의어 deal with. [본문으로]
78. dodge ; 2. 뚫고 빠져나가다, 교묘하게 속이다; 농락하다 ;; [VERB] If you dodge, you move suddenly, often to avoid being hit, caught, or seen. [본문으로]
79. be suited to[for] ; …에 적합하다[맞다] [본문으로]
80. elude ; [타동사] 1. <포박·위험 등을> (교묘하게 몸을 돌려) 피하다, 벗어나다; <법·의무·지불 등을> 회피하다(evade); 자취를 감추다, 발견되지 않다 ; 유의어 escape ;; [VERB] [no passive] If something that you want eludes you, you fail to obtain it. [본문으로]
81. for years ; 수년간, 몇 해 동안 [본문으로]
82. take up ; 7. (제의 등을) 받아들이다 [본문으로]
83. be poised to do ; …할 만반의 태세를 갖추고 있다, …할 것을 각오하고 있다 [본문으로]
84. campaign promise ; [명사] 선거 공약. [본문으로]
85. in limbo ; 잊혀져, 무시되어; 불확실한 상태로 ;; in a state of uncertainty or between two states [본문으로]