Source: https://fr.scribd.com/document/399944374/Hawaii-joins-lawsuit-against-Trump-over-border-wall-funding
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 08:52:18+00:00

Document:
The full text of the lawsuit filed Monday, claiming President Trump's emergency declaration to secure border wall funding is unconstitutional.
Dr. Jerome Swartz and Three Other Defendants Accused of Fraud of $17.7 Million.
17 STATE OF CALIFORNIA; STATE OF Case No.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; U.S.
2 Acting Secretary of Defense; MARK T.
5 as Secretary of the Air Force; U.S.
7 fundamental separation of powers principles engrained in the United States Constitution.
13 unconstitutional and unlawful scheme.
20 clear that funding could not be used to build President Trump’s proposed border wall.
2 with the “Executive Action,” the “Executive Actions”).
9 not satisfy the criteria in the statutes that it invokes to enable it to do so.
15 military construction projects located in Plaintiff States will cause damage to their economies.
19 damage to those States’ natural resources.
9 and well-being of Plaintiff States’ residents, cries out for judicial intervention.
13 furtherance of President Trump’s Executive Actions.
16 Constitution and the laws of the United States. This Court also has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
17 sections 1331 and 2201.
20 injunctive relief under 28 U.S.C. sections 2201 and 2202.
25 which Defendants are agencies of the United States or officers of such an agency.
28 States both maintain offices in the District in San Francisco.
4 sovereign state of the United States of America.
9 constitutional, common law, and statutory authority.
13 executive branch agencies, including those whose injuries are discussed in this Complaint. Cal.
15 Guard. Cal. Const., art. V, § 7; Cal. Mil. & Vet. Code § 550 et seq.
24 enforcement funding to the State caused by Defendants’ diversion of funding.
3 enforcement officers and their agencies.
6 federal defense spending in California due to diversion of funding to the border wall.
8 residents. Alfred L. Snapp & Son, Inc. v. Puerto Rico ex rel. Barez, 458 U.S. 592, 607 (1982).
11 reduction in economic activity. Wyoming v. Oklahoma, 502 U.S. 437, 448-50 (1992).
14 v. Trump, 859 F.3d 741, 765 (9th Cir. 2017), rev’d on other grounds, 138 S. Ct. 2392 (2018).
16 California’s National Guard units harms the State.
22 employment, and economic activity.
24 fish, and water—that are held in trust by the State for its residents. Sierra Forest Legacy v.
25 Sherman, 646 F.3d 1161, 1178 (9th Cir. 2011).
28 or “rare” will be seriously at risk.
5 the State through their effects on California residents, businesses, and the environment.
7 30. The State of Colorado is a sovereign state of the United States of America.
11 civil and criminal, in which the state is a party.” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-31-101.
13 has standing to bring this action for at least two reasons.
16 to address drugs illegal under state law in Colorado.
22 harms Colorado and its economy.
25 sovereign state of the United States of America.
27 Connecticut and has the authority to file civil actions to protect Connecticut’s rights and interests.
2 sovereign, and proprietary interests.
6 executive branch agencies, including those whose injuries are discussed in this Complaint. Conn.
7 Const. art IV, § 5.
17 and compromise the public safety of all Connecticut residents.
20 sovereign state of the United States of America.
3 take care that Delaware’s laws be faithfully executed. Del. Const., Art. III, §§ 1, 8.
6 Defendants’ unconstitutional and unlawful diversion of funding discussed herein.
13 Domestic Product, the economic interests, and tax revenues of the State of Delaware.
16 injury in fact, which is fairly traceable to Defendants’ conduct as set forth herein.
19 sovereign state of the United States of America.
25 General’s constitutional, statutory, and common law authority. See Haw. Const. art. V, § 6; Haw.
26 Rev. Stat. Chapter 28; Haw. Rev. Stat. § 26-7.
2 activity threatens the public safety of all Hawaii residents.
8 at risk of losing in excess of $300 million in military construction funds.
10 50. The State of Illinois is a sovereign state of the United States of America.
12 Raoul, the State’s chief legal officer. See Ill. Const., Art. 5, § 15; 15 Ill. Comp. Stat. 205/4.
19 interdiction and counter-narcotics activity threatens the public safety of all Illinois residents.
23 border wall on the nation’s southern border.
27 harm to Illinois’s sovereign, quasi-sovereign, and proprietary interests.
3 sovereign state of United States of America.
6 general charge, supervision, and direction of the State’s legal business. Me. Const. art. IX, Sec.
11 and common law authority.
12 58. The Governor of Maine, Janet T. Mills, is the chief executive officer of the State.
17 National Guard. 37-B M.R.S. §§ 103 et seq.
23 federal defense spending in Maine due to diversion of funding to the border wall.
25 residents, including protecting its residents from harms to their economic health.
26 62. Maine has an interest in the State’s economic vitality and workforce.
27 63. Maine has an interest in preventing diminution of its tax revenues.
1 will harm Maine’s economy.
3 military construction projects in Maine.
5 66. The State of Maryland is a sovereign state of the United States of America.
9 government that threatens the public interest and welfare of Maryland residents. Md. Const. art.
10 V, § 3(a)(2); 2017 Md. Laws, J. Res. 1.
14 threaten the public safety of all Marylanders.
16 this action because of the injury due to the diversion of funding for military construction projects.
18 funding for currently planned projects at Fort Meade and Joint Base Andrews.
22 and are represented by and through the Attorney General Dana Nessel.
25 Michigan, to protect Michigan residents. Fieger v. Cox, 734 N.W.2d 602, 604 (Mich. Ct. App.
1 substantial number of employees on a full-time basis, and operates over 40 facilities in the state.
6 vital service for the People of Michigan.
9 sovereign state of the United States of America.
13 quasi-sovereign, and proprietary interests.
18 executive branch agencies injured by the actions described in this Complaint.
1 compromise the health and safety of Minnesota residents.
4 Mexico border would also harm Minnesota, its economy, and its residents.
6 78. The State of New Jersey is a sovereign state of the United States of America.
7 79. This action is being brought on behalf of the State by Attorney General Gurbir S.
8 Grewal, the State’s chief legal officer. See N.J. Stat. Ann. § 52:17A-4(e), (g).
12 narcotic activity threatens the public safety of all New Jersey residents.
16 on the nation’s southern border.
20 include harm to New Jersey’s sovereign, quasi-sovereign, and proprietary interests.
23 sovereign state of the United States of America.
26 when, in his judgment, the interest of the State requires such action. N.M. Stat. Ann. § 8-5-2(B).
4 agencies that will be affected by Defendants’ actions. N.M. Const., art. V, § 5.
7 narcotics efforts threatens the safety and health of all New Mexicans.
13 the communities surrounding these military installations.
U.S. Army (Jan. 10, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/y3yr24yr.
25 U.S. International Borders, supra note 2.
CBP, (Aug. 17, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/y557wpcb.
1 sovereign state of the United States of America.
3 and has the authority to commence actions in federal court to protect the interests of the State.
4 Nev. Rev. Stat. 228.170.
5 92. Governor Stephen F. Sisolak is the chief executive officer of the State of Nevada.
8 the Nevada state military forces. Nev. Const., art. 5, § 5.
21 counter-narcotic activity in the State threatens the public safety of all Nevadans.
23 the State through their effects on Nevada’s residents and its economy.
5 threaten the public safety of all New Yorkers.
9 of New York’s National Guard and of all New York residents.
12 a sovereign state in the United States of America.
15 160.060, ORS 180.210, and ORS 180.220.
20 area with other States, would threaten the public safety of all Oregonians.
26 flooding and other dangers to the health and safety of Oregonians.
4 its departments, and its agencies in “all civil litigation in which any of them are interested.” Va.
5 Code Ann. § 2.2-507(A).
7 construction funding harms the Commonwealth of Virginia and provides a basis for standing.
13 Humphreys Engineer Center, Joint Base Langley-Eustis, and the Pentagon.
18 public safety of all Virginians.
22 is sued in his official capacity.
24 consistent with the United States Constitution.
27 the President’s Executive Actions.
2 action. Defendant Shanahan is sued in his official capacity.
5 Plaintiffs in this action. Defendant Esper is sued in his official capacity.
8 Plaintiffs in this action. Defendant Spencer is sued in his official capacity.
11 challenged by Plaintiffs in this action. Defendant Wilson is sued in her official capacity.
17 action. Defendant Mnuchin is sued in his official capacity.
20 is consistent with the laws and Constitution of the United States.
22 responsible for the actions and decisions that are being challenged by Plaintiffs in this action.
23 Defendant Nielsen is sued in her official capacity.
28 Plaintiffs in this action. Defendant Bernhardt is sued in his official capacity.
9 “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best . . . They’re bringing drugs.
11 Mexico pay for it became a consistent theme of his campaign.
Id. (Feb. 3, 2019, 2:03 PM), https://tinyurl.com/yywmw9yx.
27 Id. (Jul. 13, 2016, 2:56 PM), https://tinyurl.com/gm8yty6.
Id. (Aug. 27, 2016, 7:17 AM), https://tinyurl.com/y3f6bp9s.
6 the border wall and his intention to build it.
Wall, Transcript Reveals, Wash. Post (Aug. 3, 2017), https://tinyurl.com/y3gqdf2m.
Time, President Trump Ranted for 77 Minutes in Phoenix. Here’s What He Said (Aug.
Id. (Feb. 23, 2018, 3:28 AM), https://tinyurl.com/y9xypa55.
11 President in January 2017.
Id. (June 21, 2018, 5:12 AM), https://tinyurl.com/y3zaqk7d.
22 Id. (Dec. 19, 2018, 5:43 AM), https://tinyurl.com/y95cnd8r.
Id. (Dec. 31, 2018, 5:29 AM), https://tinyurl.com/y6stmopr.
Americans in 2016 in Texas”) (emphasis in original).
Border (Jan. 8, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y5uloxyg.
6 rather than an actual national emergency at the border.
22 percent of methamphetamine, and 80 percent of fentanyl at ports of entry in this fiscal year).
23 205 (Sept. 2018), https://tinyurl.com/y93n5fes.
Trump Remarks before Marine One Departure, supra note 23.
25 if Democrats Defy Me, Wash. Post (Jan 9, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/y4vmtezb.
shutdown, which was to end on February 15).
construction of border barriers and related infrastructure when Congress deemed it appropriate.
19 wall right now. . . . it’s been funded . . . . . We’ll be up to, by the end of this year, 115 miles. . . .
21 finished. Now whether or not I declare a national emergency, that you’ll see”); see also Donald J.
22 (“Wall is being built!”).
23 Southern Border (Feb. 1, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y5ghp3eh.
3 December 22, 2018 deadline when federal funding ran out for a number of federal departments.
14 government through February 8, 2019 that did not include any funding for a border wall.
15 Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2018, H.R. 695, 115th Cong. (2018).
4 Construction, and Improvements.” Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2018, H.R.
5 695, 115th Cong. (2018). The Senate never passed the House-approved version of the legislation.
7 22, 2018, the federal government partially shut down.
12 Cong. (2019). The Senate never passed the House approved version of the legislation.
26 (Jan. 2, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y77o89hp.
27 Southern Border and the Shutdown (Jan. 19, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y7gdj6s8.
6 the construction of a barrier.
19 Act, stated, “The agreement does not fund President Trump’s wasteful wall.” 165 Cong. Rec.
23 ed. Feb. 14, 2019). The congressional record in the House of Representatives is no different.
25 agreement denies the President billions of dollars for an unnecessary wall.”); 165 Cong. Rec.
26 H2020 (daily ed. Feb. 14, 2019) (statement of Rep. Aguilar) (“What this bill will not do is . . .
27 fund the President’s wall from sea to shining sea, a wall that he said Mexico would pay for.”).
1 Appropriations Act into law.
27 the Southern Border of the United States (Feb. 15, 2019).
20 actual urgent need for it to be built immediately: “I could do the wall over a longer period of time.
28 Crisis on our Southern Border (Feb. 15, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y3jenqeu.
13 Congress in other federal statutes, when there is a national emergency, and one has been declared.
14 50 U.S.C. § 1621.
17 national emergency in the Federal Register and transmit it to Congress. 50 U.S.C. § 1631.
18 B. Section 2808’s Emergency Military Construction Authority (10 U.S.C.
26 forces.” 10 U.S.C. § 2808(a).
3 obligated.” 10 U.S.C. § 2808(a).
7 other activity under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of a military department.” 10 U.S.C. § 2801.
8 C. Section 284’s Authority to Support Counter-Drug Activities (10 U.S.C.
17 boundaries of the United States.” Id.
Id. (citing 10 U.S.C. § 284).
26 Appropriations Act, 2019 and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2019, Pub. L. No. 115-245 (Sept.
(last visited Feb. 17, 2019).
15 federal actions “significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.” Robertson v.
16 Methow Valley Citizen Council, 490 U.S. 332, 348 (1989) (citing 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (2)(C)).
23 imposed for the protection of the environment.” 40 C.F.R. § 1508.27(10).
National Guard Counterdrug Program, GAO-19-27 (Jan. 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y4e6ocra.
Border Security Victory, supra note 43.
Id. (also the source of data for the graph included herein).
https://tinyurl.com/yyazdqm7 (last visited Feb. 17, 2019).
https://tinyurl.com/y73mzshs (last visited Feb. 17, 2019).
between Ports of Entry (Sept. 2017), https://tinyurl.com/y9gbn5js.
4 monthly southwest border apprehensions.
10 approximately one day’s average apprehensions and less than 4% of monthly apprehensions.
26 See Southwest Border Migration, supra note 57.
27 wall, The Guardian (Jan. 17, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/yas7msld.
Southwest Border Migration, supra note 57.
23 Ctr. for Migration Studies (Jan. 16, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y7wa849r.
24 (Jan. 29, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y9r6kkhu.
Reserve Bank of Dallas economist).
Differences with President, Wash. Post (Jan. 29, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y45voevk.
4 here are without factual basis.
9 analysis, show that these claims are false.
24 apprehended at the Southern Border).
attempted to enter by land were doing so at the northern or southern border.
19 justification for declaring an emergency requiring the diversion of funds to build a wall.
26 Alex Nowrasteh, Does the Migrant Caravan Pose a Serious Terrorism Risk?, Cato Inst.
DNI Report, supra note 68 at 10–13.
1 to draw between unauthorized immigration and increased crime rates is false.
22 Inst. Res. and Pol’y Br. No. 7 (Jun. 4, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/y2jn4e3x.
24 Crime? Criminology (Mar. 25, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/ycyzsf27.
https://tinyurl.com/y6czenh7; see also Anna Flag, The Myth of the Criminal Immigrant, N.Y.
26 Times (Mar. 30, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/y9hcu6kp.
27 American (Feb. 7, 2017), https://tinyurl.com/h8xauk2.
17 Rep. (Jul. 13, 2015), https://tinyurl.com/jxcv9aq.
in 1998 to 382.9 per 100,000 inhabitants in 2017), https://tinyurl.com/yyvc6636 (last visited Feb.
crime data from El Paso County Sheriff’s Office and FBI Uniform Crime Reports).
communities include meth, heroin, cocaine, and fentanyl.”).
Field Operations at ports of entry).
8 218. Overall, drug seizures outside legal points of entry have significantly decreased.
13 Trump has invoked in support of the border wall101—“Chinese synthetic drug suppliers . . .
CBP Enforcement Statistics FY2018, supra note 94.
DNI Report, supra note 68.
Trump Address on Crisis at Border, supra note 25.
DNI Report, supra note 68 at 18.
5 including contract awards in California105 and Arizona106 in Fall 2018.
16 corridors.” 10 U.S.C. § 284(b)(7).
20 Defendants’ unlawful actions undertaken to construct the border wall. See Parties section supra.
22 Construction Costs 7 (Jan. 29, 2009), https://tinyurl.com/y2kgefp5.
25 https://tinyurl.com/y2t5u6pw (announcing $172 million contract with Barnard Construction Co.
26 to build border barriers).
27 Event of a National Emergency, Cong. Res. Serv. (Jan. 11, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y23t8xbc.
3 welfare of its residents.
6 arising from the impairment of the State’s criminal and narcotics operations.
9 purposes, negatively impacting the public safety and welfare of California’s residents.
10 234. California also will be harmed by diversion of funding for military construction.
Devin Lavelle, California Statewide National Security Economic Impacts, Cal. Res.
27 Bureau (Aug. 2018), https://tinyurl.com/yxqlw43b.
available on the White House website but then taken down that same day.
28 2019 (Feb. 2018), https://tinyurl.com/yy85dch9.
2 wall construction, California stands to suffer economic harm.
4 construction, drug interdiction, and drug forfeiture funding.
18 12, 2018, are areas within or near the Otay Wilderness Area.
DHS, Walls Work (Dec. 12, 2018), https://tinyurl.com/y7ca6byc.
25 Capability Gaps 48, https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-17-331.
Southwest Border Security, supra note 122.
20 unconstitutional diversion of funds.
CBP, Border Fencing 2011 & 2017, supra note 123.
Management, Jacumba Wilderness https://tinyurl.com/y43hv424 (last visited Feb. 17, 2019); U.S.
26 https://tinyurl.com/y3ymkazn (last visited Feb. 17, 2019).
Wilderness Connect, Otay Mountain, supra note 126.
https://tinyurl.com/yyvu5kwa (last visited Feb. 17, 2019).
2 including direct and indirect impacts to endangered or threatened wildlife.
14 disrupt or destroy habitat of these migratory animals, nesting birds and reclusive reptiles.
1 preventing the extinction of this species.
18 Legacy, 646 F.3d at 1178.
28 visited Feb. 17, 2019); 79 Fed. Reg. 12571 (Mar. 5, 2014).
12 appropriations already approved by Congress and signed into law by the President. Clinton v.
13 City of New York, 524 U.S. 417, 438 (1998).
23 the Court should enjoin Defendants’ implementation of the President’s Executive Actions.
5 States, 301 U.S. 308, 321 (1937)).
9 were not appropriated for that purpose.
12 the Court should enjoin Defendants’ implementation of the President’s Executive Actions.
18 their constitutional and/or statutory authority.
20 National Emergencies Act because no emergency exists to warrant the invocation of that statute.
2 U.S.C. section 9705 for failure to meet the criteria required under that statute.
5 Court should enjoin Defendants’ implementation of the President’s Executive Actions.
11 276. Defendant DHS is an “agency” under the APA, 5 U.S.C. § 552(1).
16 funding and other resources for those southern border wall construction projects.
27 Responsibility Act (8 U.S.C. § 1103 note). 84 Fed. Reg. 2897 (February 8, 2019); 83 Fed. Reg.
6 and/or California Endangered Species Act.
17 denies California’s and New Mexico’s procedural rights necessary to protect these interests.
GOP into a Risky Fight Ahead of 2020, Wash. Post (Feb. 15, 2019), https://tinyurl.com/y4l3lu99.
White House, President Trump’s Feb. 15, 2019, Remarks, supra note 50.
7 5. Grant such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

References: § 7
 § 550
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 § 24
 § 5
 § 6
 § 26
 Art. 5
 § 15
 art.
10
 § 3
 v. 
 § 52
 § 8
 § 5
 art. 5
 § 5
 § 2
 § 1621
 § 1631
 § 2808
 § 2808
 § 2801
 § 284
 v.

 § 4332
 § 1508
 § 284
 v.

 § 552
 § 1103