Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: What you should know about the U.S. president’s emergency powers
Explainer: What you should know about the U.S. president’s emergency powers
Mar 12, 2026 10:45 AM

What just happened?

Last Friday President Trump said he was considering using his national emergency powers to secure funding for the construction of a border wall between U.S.-Mexico border. “We can call a national emergency and build it very quickly,” said the president.

What are national emergency powers?

The President of the United States has certain powers that may be exercised in the event that the nation is threatened by crisis, exigency, or emergency circumstances (other than natural disasters, war, or near-war situations). Some of these powers are either implied or explicitly stated by the U.S. Constitution. Others are delegations of authority through legislation, such as the National Emergencies Act.

How does a U.S. President declare a national emergency?

The president can declare a national emergency through an executive order. Per the National Emergencies Act, the president must specifically declare a national emergency and act in accordance with the rest of the Act.

What is the National Emergencies Act?

The National Emergencies Act (NEA) is a law passed by Congress in 1976 that authorizes the president to declare a national emergency. A declaration under NEA triggers emergency authorities contained in other federal statutes.

The NEA does not provide any specific emergency authority on its own, but relies on emergency authorities provided in other statutes. A national emergency declaration allows for the activation of these other statutory authorities, though they must be specifically identified in the president’s declaration before taking effect.

How are national emergencies ended?

After a president declares a national emergency, it can be terminated only by a proclamation of the president or by a concurrent resolution of Congress.

What are the accountability requirements during a national emergency?

There are three main requirement outlined in the National Emergencies Act:

• The President must maintain a file and index of all significant orders, rules, and regulations, issued during such emergency pursuant to such declarations.

• All such significant orders of the president must be promptly transmitted to Congress.

• The president shall transmit to Congress, within ninety days after the end of each six-month period after such declaration, a report on the total expenditures incurred by the U.S. Government during such six-month period which are directly attributable to the exercise of powers and authorities conferred by such declaration. Not later than ninety days after the termination of each such emergency or war, the President shall transmit a final report on all such expenditures.

How many national emergency declarations have been issued?

Since the NEA took effect in 1976 there have been over fifty declarations of national emergency by U.S. presidents. Currently, 28 are still in effect (the date is the year the emergency was declared):

1979 — Blocking Iranian Government Property

1994 — Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

1995 — Prohibiting Transactions with Terrorists Who Threaten to Disrupt the Middle East Peace Process

1995 — Prohibiting Certain Transactions with Respect to the Development of Iranian Petroleum

1995 — Blocking Assets and Prohibiting Transactions with Significant Narcotics Traffickers

1997 — Blocking Sudanese Government Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Sudan

1998 — Blocking Property of the Governments of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), the Republic of Serbia, and the Republic of Montenegro, and Prohibiting New Investment in the Republic of Serbia in Response to the Situation in Kosovo

2001 — Continuation of Export Control Regulations

2001— Declaration of National Emergency by Reason of Certain Terrorist Attacks

2001— Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions with Persons who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism

2003 — Blocking Property of Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Zimbabwe

2003— Protecting the Development Fund for Iraq and Certain Other Property in Which Iraq has an Interest

2004— Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting the Export of Certain Goods to Syria

2004— Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting the Importation of Certain Goods from Liberia

2006— Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in Côte d’Ivoire

2006— Blocking Property of Certain Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Belarus

2006— Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

2007— Blocking Property of Persons Undermining the Sovereignty of Lebanon or Its Democratic Processes and Institutions

2008— Continuing Certain Restrictions with Respect to North Korea and North Korean Nationals

2010— Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in Somalia

2011— Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Libya

2011— Blocking Property of Transnational Criminal Organizations

2012— Blocking Property of Persons Threatening the Peace, Security, or Stability of Yemen

2014— Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine

2014— Blocking Property of Certain Persons With Respect to South Sudan

2014— Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Central African Republic

2015— Blocking Property and Suspending Entry of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Venezuela

2015— Blocking the Property of Certain Persons Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities

2015— Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Burundi

Can President Trump declare a national emergency on border security?

Under the NEA, President Trump has broad latitude to issue an emergency proclamation. However, if he issues such an executive order he will almost assuredly by immediately sued by members of Congress. Even before the passage of the NEA the Courts put limits on the president’s ability to use the emergency powers to enact policy.

For example, during the Korean War President Truman issued an executive order directing Secretary of Commerce Charles Sawyer to seize and operate most of the nation’s steel mills. This was done in order to avert the expected effects of a strike by the United Steelworkers of America. In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that the President did not have the authority to issue such an order, and said that “the President’s power to see that the laws are faithfully executed refutes the idea that he is to be a lawmaker.”

Based on the president’s ments and actions, the Supreme Court would likely rule such action as an unconstitutional attempt to get around Congress’s refusal to fund the border wall.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The School Zone to Serfdom
The Washington Post recentlyreported on what looked like an interesting development in education reform going on in California: The national battle over the best way to fix failing schools is ripping through this desert town like a sandstorm, tearing apart munity that is testing a radical new approach: the parent takeover. Parents here are trying to e the first in the country to use a trigger law, which allows a majority of families at a struggling school to force major...
Samuel Gregg: Benedict XVI and the Irrelevance of ‘Relevance’
In a new analysis in Crisis Magazine, Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg examines “the shifting critiques” of the pontificate of Benedict XVI including the latest appraisal that the world is losing interest in the Catholic Church particularly because of its declining geopolitical “relevance.” But how do some of these critiques understand relevance? On one reading, it parisons with Benedict’s heroic predecessor, who played an indispensible role in demolishing the Communist thug-ocracies that once brutalized much of Europe. But it’s also...
Religious Liberty, Rhetoric, and Partisan Squawking
A look at religious liberty, the HHS Mandate, and political discourse. Read More… Concerning the HHS mandate, somehow getting lost in the shuffle is the primacy of religious liberty. Mollie Hemingway offers a good post at Ricochet on the media blackout. Certainly, political partisanship and lust for power is clouding the centrality of the First Amendment. I recently heard two women chatting in a public place about this issue. They had convinced themselves that Rick Santorum wanted to snatch their...
Where Corporatism and Crony Contraceptives Collide
In an Acton Commentary last month, Jordan Ballor presented a helpful explanation of the differences between “capitalism” and “corporatism”, a capitalist system that has been corrupted: The main dynamic of the market system is the relationship between the producer and the consumer. Corporatism, by contrast, brings to the fore the role of the “managerial state,” in which the government takes on an increasingly larger task in telling producers what they should produce and consumers what they should consume. This can...
Faith and Family Can Close the Achievement Gap
One of the most problematic aspects of the U.S. educational system is the persistence of the achievement gap. White students generally perform better on tests than black students. Rich students generally perform better than poor students. And students of similar socioeconomic background perform differently across classrooms and school systems. The effect is not only felt on the individual level—low school performance has been linked to crime, low earnings and poor health—but on our country’s economy. The consulting firm McKinsey &...
Christian Libertarianism Revisited
Last week, in reply to a post by Jacqueline Otto, I wrote an article asking What is a Christian Libertarian? Ms. Otto has written an additional reply entitled, “Four Things Christian Libertarians Believe.” To address Mr. Carter’s doubts, and to counter Mr. Teetsel’s unbelief, here is my layman’s attempt to articulate four of the fundamental beliefs held by Christian libertarians that synthesize their faith with their political ideology. For a more developed understanding, please visit Norman Horn’s website: While I...
Malthus and the Contraceptive Mandate
“The power of population,” wrote the Rev. Thomas Robert Malthus in 1798, “is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man.” In other words, unless population growth is checked by moral restraint (refraining from having babies) or disaster (disease, famine, war) widespread poverty and degradation inevitably result. Or so thought Malthus and many other intellectuals of his era. Unfortunately, methods of population control range from the unpleasant (disease, famine, war) to the downright horrifying (abstinence)....
Indivisible a New York Times Bestseller
Former Acton Research fellow Jay Richards’ new co-authored book, Indivisible, has climbed onto The New York Times Bestseller list, holding onto a top ten spot for a second week. The book was published by FaithWords and, in an interesting cross-publishing arrangement, is also available in an Ignatius press edition with a foreword by Ignatius founder Fr. Joseph Fessio. Jay’s co-author, James Robison, is the co-host of the evangelical daily show LIFE Today. If you’ve had the chance to hear Jay...
The Temptations of Poverty
Galatians 2:10 reads, “All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I had been eager to do all along.” This is the conclusion to the Jerusalem Council, in which Paul and the leaders in Jerusalem are reconciled and unified, and where is decided that Paul and Barnabas “should go to the Gentiles, and they [James, Peter, and John] to the circumcised” (v. 9). The concluding point that both groups are to keep in...
Do the Poor Need Capitalism?
A 2009 paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research says that the number of people in the world living on less than $1 per day fell from 403 million in 1970 to 152 million in 2006. An analysis from the American Enterprise Institute says the biggest factor was the rise of the middle class in China and India, at a time when the world’s population grew by 3 billion. Is capitalism a greater asset than liability in the fight...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved