Know your vote. Take a look at your sample ballot now!

Trump v. Sierra Club

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Supreme Court of the United States
Trump v. Sierra Club
Docket number: 20-138
Term: 2020
Court: United States Supreme Court
Important dates
Pending
Court membership
Chief Justice John G. Roberts • Clarence Thomas • Stephen Breyer • Samuel Alito • Sonia Sotomayor • Elena Kagan • Neil Gorsuch • Brett Kavanaugh


Trump v. Sierra Club is a case scheduled for argument before the Supreme Court of the United States during the court's October 2020-2021 term. The case came on a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. It concerned funding for a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The case: In 2019, the acting secretary of defense transferred $2.5 billion under Section 8005 of the 2019 Department of Defense (DoD) Appropriations Act. The transfer was to fund the construction of fencing, roads, and lighting along the U.S.-Mexico border. The Sierra Club sued the DoD, alleging the secretary did not have the authority to transfer the funds. A U.S. district court ruled in favor of the Sierra Club and issued an order prohibiting the government from using the funds to construct a wall. The U.S. Supreme Court then stayed the district court's order, holding the Sierra Club did not have standing to challenge the transfer. A divided panel of the 9th Circuit reaffirmed the district court's ruling.[1]
  • The issues: (1) Whether the Sierra Club has a cognizable cause of action to challenge the acting secretary's transfer of funds under Section 8005. (2) Whether the acting secretary exceeded his authority under Section 8005 by transferring the funds.[1]
  • The outcome: The appeal is pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.


    • Click here to review the lower court's opinion.

    Timeline

    The following timeline details key events in this case:

    • February 3, 2021: The U.S. Supreme Court removed the case from its February argument calendar. Oral arguments had been scheduled for February 22, 2021.[2]
    • October 19, 2020: The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
    • August 7, 2020: Donald Trump (R), the petitioner, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in his official capacity as president of the United States. Click here for a list of other petitioners involved.
    • June 26, 2020: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California's ruling.
    • July 26, 2019: The U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Northern District of California's ruling.
    • June 28, 2019: The Northern District of California issued a permanent injunction against using the transferred funds at issue to build a border wall.

    Background

    Legal background

    In 2019, the Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan transferred $2.5 billion under Section 8005 of the 2019 Department of Defense (DoD) Appropriations Act. The transfer was enacted so the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could "undertake the construction of more than 100 miles of fencing, along with roads and lighting," on the United States-Mexico border.[1]

    The Sierra Club and the Southern Border Communities Coalition (collectively, Sierra Club), challenged the transfer in court. The Sierra Club argued the construction would negatively impact its members' ability to undertake "professional, scientific, recreational, and aesthetic activities" including hiking, birdwatching, and photography. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in favor of the Sierra Club, issuing a permanent injunction prohibiting the U.S. government from using the funds to build a border wall. The court held (1) the Sierra Club had a "constitutional cause of action" and (2) the acting secretary exceeded his authority by transferring the funds.[1]

    The government appealed, and a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirmed the lower court's opinion. Judge Norman Randy Smith dissented. The U.S. Supreme Court stayed the district court's injunction.[1]

    Reviewing on the merits, a second 9th Circuit panel affirmed the district court's ruling a second time. This panel ruled the acting secretary did not have the authority to transfer the funds under Section 8005 and the Sierra Club had standing to sue the government over the transfers. The panel also ruled the Sierra Club did not need to show that its interests were protected by Section 8005. Judge Daniel Collins dissented.[1]

    Department of Defense Appropriations Act

    The Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2019 (Pub. L. No. 115-245, Div. A, Tit. VIII, 132 Stat. 2999) provided $667.3 billion to fund the U.S. Department of Defense.[3]

    Section 8005

    When the U.S. Supreme Court considered this case, Section 8005 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act read:[4]

    “ Upon determination by the Secretary of Defense that such action is necessary in the national interest, he may, with the approval of the Office of Management and Budget, transfer not to exceed $4,000,000,000 of working capital funds of the Department of Defense or funds made available in this Act to the Department of Defense for military functions (except military construction) between such appropriations or funds or any subdivision thereof, to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes, and for the same time period, as the appropriation or fund to which transferred.[5] ”
    —Section 8005, Department of Defense Appropriations Act (FY 2019)


    Section 8005 also limited its authority to be invoked to "higher priority items, based on unforeseen military requirements, than those for which originally appropriated and in no case where the item for which funds are requested has been denied by the Congress."[4]

    Section 9002

    When the U.S. Supreme Court considered this case, Section 9002 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act read:[4]

    “ Upon the determination of the Secretary of Defense that such action is necessary in the national interest, the Secretary may, with the approval of the Office of Management and Budget, transfer up to $2,000,000,000 between the appropriations or funds made available to the Department of Defense in this title: Provided, That the Secretary shall notify the Congress promptly of each transfer made pursuant to the authority in this section: Provided further, That the authority provided in this section is in addition to any other transfer authority available to the Department of Defense and is subject to the same terms and conditions as the authority provided in section 8005 of this Act.[5] ”
    —Section 9002, Department of Defense Appropriations Act (FY 2019)

    Debate over funding for a border wall

    See also: Federal policy on immigration, 2017-2020

    On December 21, 2018, President Trump announced that the government would shut down unless border wall funding was included in a continuing resolution (CR) to fund the government beyond midnight on December 22. The statement came after the Senate passed a CR that did not include funds for a border wall on December 19.

    On January 8, 2019—the 18th day of a partial government shutdown that began over border wall funding—President Trump called on Congress to allocate $5.7 billion to build a wall or steel barrier on the southern border to protect the nation. Trump said that he would not sign legislation to end the partial shutdown if it did not include funding for border security.[6]

    Immediately after Trump’s speech, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), issued a televised response rejecting Trump’s request for a border wall and calling on him to reopen the government.[7]

    On February 15, 2019, Trump signed a $328 billion spending bill that included $1.375 billion in funding for barriers on the southern border. Because he did not get the $5.7 billion amount requested, he declared a state of emergency on the southern border and directed $8.1 billion to build a border wall.[8]

    Petitioners and respondents

    Petitioners

    The petitioners in this case included:

    Respondents

    The respondents in this case included the Sierra Club and the Southern Border Communities Coalition.[1]

    Questions presented

    The petitioner presented the following questions to the court:[1]

    Questions presented:
    “ (1) Whether respondents have a cognizable cause of action to obtain review of the Acting Secretary’s compliance with Section 8005’s proviso in transferring funds internally between DoD appropriations accounts.


    (2) Whether the Acting Secretary exceeded his statutory authority under Section 8005 in making the transfers at issue.[5]

    		”

    Oral argument

    On February 3, 2021, the court granted the United States government's motion to hold further briefings and remove the case from its February argument calendar. Oral arguments had initially been scheduled for February 22, 2021.[2]

    The Biden administration asked the court to remove the case from its argument calendar in light of policy changes enacted on January 20, 2021.[9]

    Audio

    Audio of the case will be posted here when it is made available.

    Transcript

    A transcript of the case will be posted here when it is made available.

    Outcome

    The case is pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.

    October term 2020-2021

    The Supreme Court began hearing cases for the term on October 5, 2020. The court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions in mid-June.[10]

    The court issued 67 opinions during its 2020-2021 term. Two cases were decided in one consolidated opinion. Ten cases were decided without argument. Click here for more information on the court's opinions.

    The court agreed to hear 62 cases during its 2020-2021 term. Of those, 12 were originally scheduled for the 2019-2020 term but were delayed due to the coronavirus pandemic. Five cases were removed from the argument calendar.


    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 Supreme Court of the United States, Trump v. Sierra Club: "Petition for a writ of certiorari," accessed October 19, 2020
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Supreme Court of the United States, "Order List: 592 U.S.," accessed February 3, 2021
    3. ↑ Congressional Research Service, "FY2019 Defense Appropriations Act (P.L. 115-245)," April 12, 2019
    4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, Sierra Club v. Trump, decided June 26, 2020
    5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    6. ↑ WhiteHouse.gov, "President Donald J. Trump’s Address to the Nation on the Crisis at the Border," January 8, 2019
    7. ↑ The Wall Street Journal, "Democratic Leaders Denounce Wall, Call on Trump to Stop ‘Hostage’ Tactics," January 8, 2019
    8. ↑ WhiteHouse.gov, "President Donald J. Trump’s Border Security Victory," February 15, 2019
    9. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "No. 20-138 MOTION OF THE PETITIONERS TO HOLD THE BRIEFING SCHEDULE IN ABEYANCE AND TO REMOVE THE CASE FROM THE FEBRUARY 2021 ARGUMENT CALENDAR," accessed February 4, 2021
    10. ↑ SupremeCourt.gov, "A Brief Overview of the Supreme Court," accessed April 20, 2015
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Trump_v._Sierra_Club&oldid=8747866"