Time as a Policy Mechanism and Intelligible Principle: An Examination of the National Emergencies Act

The effective oversight and management of national emergencies are critical to preserving democratic processes and norms. Congress passed the National Emergencies Act (NEA) of 1976 to regulate the open-ended and unchecked implementation of emergency authorities by the president. Notwithstanding the NEA's objectives, the number and duration of national emergencies are proliferating. National emergencies evoke a sense of urgency that results in exceptional governance procedures and alters official and public perceptions. However, national emergencies declared under the NEA rarely reflect the definition of urgency and endure for years, indicating potential oversight failures and a re-emergence of the president's unchecked use of emergency power. Concerns arise that a national emergency shifts legislative power to the executive, making government policy less democratic. The national scope of these emergencies also portends the potential for harm to a broad population. Ambiguous judicial and legislative instructions, presidential aspirations of demonstrating leadership, and congressional blame avoidance further complicate the governance of national emergencies. This research conceptualizes time as the intelligible principle that Congress used to meet the judicial requirements for delegating functional responsibilities to the executive branch while retaining constitutional obligations and maintaining oversight of executive action. Sequences, deadlines, and repetition are temporal mechanisms that help regulate government action and moderate authorities. Understanding how temporal policy mechanisms affect the use of emergency authority, shape government interaction, and adjust accountability is particularly important as the United States confronts a hyper-partisan environment and demands to confront new issues as national emergencies intensify. Employing a policy tracing methodology augmented by survival and qualitative comparative analysis, this dissertation analyzes national emergency data composed of declarations, continuations, amendments, and terminations. The analysis incorporates Supreme Court decisions, budgetary impact statements, and Federal Register data to track and evaluate national emergencies declared via presidential proclamation and executive order. The ensuing model delineates the properties of the national emergencies declared under the NEA and clarifies relational factors contributing to temporal variation amongst emergency declarations. The resulting clarity contributes to scholarly and governmental use of temporal policy mechanisms—particularly sequences, deadlines, and repetition—and offers recommendations for enhancing the oversight of U.S. national emergencies.

Name thesis:degree_name

Doctor of Philosophy

Level thesis:degree_level

doctoral

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

Public Administration/Public Affairs

Department dc:contributor.department

Government and International Affairs

Grantor dc:publisher

Virginia Tech

Year dc:date.issued

2023

Author dc:creator

• Tull, Justin Wayne

Chair dc:contributor.committeechair

• Dull, Matthew Martin

Committee members dc:contributor.committeemember

• Hult, Karen M.
• Dolan, Thomas M.
• Roberts, Patrick S.

• national emergency
• time
• temporal
• deadline
• repetition
• sequence
• intelligible principle
• non-delegation doctrine

Statement dc:rights

• Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International

Licence dc:rights.uri

• http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Language dc:language.iso

en

Dc Identifier Other

vt_gsexam:38140

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/115342