In January of 2023, Congress voted to terminate one of the biggest IEP emergencies ever,

the COVID emergency, and the president went along with that.

So what the statute reflects is there's going to be the ability for a sort of political consensus

against a declared emergency.

What happens when the president simply vetoes legislation to try to take these powers back?

Well, he has the authority to veto legislation

to terminate a national emergency, for example. I mean, he retains the powers in the background, because he is still on the books. But if he declares an emergency and Congress doesn't like it and passes a joint resolution, yes, he can absolutely veto that. Congress is a practical matter. Can't get this power back once it's handed it over to the president's a one-way ratchet toward the

gradual but continual accretion of power in the executive branch and away from the people's

elected representatives i disagree with that in the recent historical counter example of congress's

termination of the covid emergency demonstrates that political the political oversight with the president's ass. With the president's assent.

With the president's assent, in fact, you know.

Once he lost it by a veto-proof majority in the Senate, I think the position, I think he realized.

And that's the political process working.

There was a little consensus against the total majority to get it back.

Yeah.

Okay.

Supreme Court is considering that, and they might even be drawing a line here.

The conservative majority has already done quite a bit to expand the authorities of the executive branch under President Trump.

You know this.

Applying their blanket immunity for what they call official acts.

Allowing mass layoffs of federal workers, allowing the firing of heads

of independent agencies, limiting injunctions that would block President Trump's agenda, or any

...