1. It's the housing and construction budget. They are combined. Do we even know how much of this budget is currently unallocated? Technically, this is all he can use. Even if it hasn't, it will ultimately potentially affect military welfare and readiness.

2. I will concede that the National Emergencies Act gives some leverage to Trump. However, it was clearly not designed to be used as a bargaining tool and/or a tool to let the President bypass congressional oversight. There's nothing in our defense strategy about securing the southern border. We are not at war with Mexico. The Mexican government is not sending invaders; people are voluntarily leaving to look for economic opportunity. He's not building a wall on Mexico's soil; He's building it on US soil (negating the foreign aspect). He is deliberately circumventing congress who is expressly opposing funding the wall. Without even trying, I just rattled off 5 potential concerns about the validity of this order (and I could keep going). This will be challenged in the Supreme Court and it SHOULD BE. There are enough questions surrounding this order to challenge it in the court of law. Claiming this is judicial overreach is just a biased opinion. It is the more conservative position to defend against the expansion of federal government and/or threat to separation of powers.

3. See Above. It isn't textualism. It's like, your opinion, man.

4. So what? Dems are gonna Dem,. Do conservatives have to do it, too? Be wary of win at all costs.

5. Eh, not gonna live or die by this specific example. You can have this point if you want.

6. What's this have to do with our discussion? Do I need to bring up every possible issue that is outrageous to be justified? Seems a bit excessive.

7. I agree with the first half of your statement, but the later half is a non sequitur. It's its own issue.

---