NOWTHEREFORE, I, JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., President of the United States of America, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), hereby declare that the national emergency declared by Proclamation 9844, and continued on February 13, 2020 (85 Fed. Reg. 8715), and January 15, 2021, is terminated and that the authorities invoked in that proclamation will no longer be used to construct a wall at the southern border. I hereby further direct as follows:
Section 1. Pause in Construction and Obligation of Funds. (a) The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, shall direct the appropriate officials within their respective departments to:
(i) pause work on each construction project on the southern border wall, to the extent permitted by law, as soon as possible but in no case later than seven days from the date of this proclamation, to permit:
(b) The pause directed in subsection (a)(i) of this section shall apply to wall projects funded by redirected funds as well as wall projects funded by direct appropriations. The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security may make an exception to the pause, however, for urgent measures needed to avert immediate physical dangers or where an exception is required to ensure that funds appropriated by the Congress fulfill their intended purpose.
Sec. 2. Plan for Redirecting Funding and Repurposing Contracts. The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Attorney General, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the heads of any other appropriate executive departments and agencies, and in consultation with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, shall develop a plan for the redirection of funds concerning the southern border wall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law. The process of developing the plan shall include consideration of terminating or repurposing contracts with private contractors engaged in wall construction, while providing for the expenditure of any funds that the Congress expressly appropriated for wall construction, consistent with their appropriated purpose. The plan shall be developed within 60 days from the date of this proclamation. After the plan is developed, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall take all appropriate steps to resume, modify, or terminate projects and to otherwise implement the plan.
(c) This proclamation is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-one, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-fifth.
We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.
Even minor damage is incredibly disruptive, and the pressure to get things right is immense. Strong Wall Construction is locally-owned and operated. We serve the greater Baltimore Metropolitan area with more than 75 years of insurance, restoration, and remodeling experience.
Mike DiNatale, is a fantastic addition to our production crew. Mike uses open communication and problem-solving techniques to give his homeowners a smooth experience. Customers who are struggling with the stress of remodeling their homes benefit from his approachable demeanor. Mike likes hanging out with his dog, snowboarding, golfing, surfing, and going crabbing with his dad. He hopes to snowboard in Alaska one day, fulfilling a lifelong dream.
A current resident of Ellicott City but originally hailing from Catonsville, Paul Alagna boasts an impressive career that spans 38 years in construction and 11 years in insurance restoration. His education and certifications include comprehensive OSHA training, construction management focusing on planning and scheduling, and Microsoft Projects.
Hailey Marcionette, a resident of White Marsh with roots in Spring Grove, Pennsylvania, brings her expertise in real estate and construction to Strong Wall as our Office Manager. She started in the industry in 2021, gaining experience in roles at a new home builder in PA and a property management company.
A lifelong resident of Harford County, MD, Jeff lives in Forest Hill. His extensive credentials include an IICRC certification in water damage restoration, certification as an EPA Lead-Safe Renovator, Advanced Xactimate & Pricing certification, OSHA-30, HAAG Residential Roofing Certification, Fire & Smoke Restoration Technician (FSRT), and Odor Control Technician (OCT).
Eric Trexler, a resident of Fallston, MD, originally from Greensburg, PA, is a seasoned professional in the construction industry with over 25 years of experience. Currently serving as the Production Manager at Strong Wall Construction, Eric brings a wealth of knowledge from his previous role with a regional home builder.
Originally from Richmond, VA, Rob Schini lives in Forest Hill, MD. He brings more than 17 years of experience, plus IICRC certifications (WRT, ASD, AMRT, FSRT, SMT) and a degree from Virginia Commonwealth University.
David takes particular pride in working on remodels, rebuilds and restoration projects. He finds satisfaction in helping homeowners through the rebuilding period and earning their satisfaction with the finished job.
The Court began by finding that the General Assembly, which had requested the advisory opinion, was authorized to do so under Article 96, paragraph 1, of the Charter. It further found that the question asked of it fell within the competence of the General Assembly pursuant to Articles 10, paragraph 2, and 11 of the Charter. Moreover, in requesting an opinion of the Court, the General Assembly had not exceeded its competence, as qualified by Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Charter, which provides that while the Security Council is exercising its functions in respect of any dispute or situation the Assembly must not make any recommendation with regard thereto unless the Security Council so requests. The Court further observed that the General Assembly had adopted resolution ES-10/14 during its Tenth Emergency Special Session, convened pursuant to resolution 377 A (V), whereby, in the event that the Security Council has failed to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, the General Assembly may consider the matter immediately with a view to making recommendations to Member States. Rejecting a number of procedural objections, the Court found that the conditions laid down by that resolution had been met when the Tenth Emergency Special Session was convened, and in particular when the General Assembly decided to request the opinion, as the Security Council had at that time been unable to adopt a resolution concerning the construction of the wall as a result of the negative vote of a permanent member. Lastly, the Court rejected the argument that an opinion could not be given in the present case on the ground that the question posed was not a legal one, or that it was of an abstract or political nature.
The Court then went on to consider the impact of the construction of the wall on the daily life of the inhabitants of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, finding that the construction of the wall and its associated rgime were contrary to the relevant provisions of the Hague Regulations of 1907 and of the Fourth Geneva Convention and that they impeded the liberty of movement of the inhabitants of the territory as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as their exercise of the right to work, to health, to education and to an adequate standard of living as proclaimed in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The Court further found that, coupled with the establishment of settlements, the construction of the wall and its associated rgime were tending to alter the demographic composition of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, thereby contravening the Fourth Geneva Convention and the relevant Security Council resolutions. The Court then considered the qualifying clauses or provisions for derogation contained in certain humanitarian law and human rights instruments, which might be invoked inter alia where military exigencies or the needs of national security or public order so required. The Court found that such clauses were not applicable in the present case, stating that it was not convinced that the specific course Israel had chosen for the wall was necessary to attain its security objectives, and that accordingly the construction of the wall constituted a breach by Israel of certain of its obligations under humanitarian and human rights law. Lastly, the Court concluded that Israel could not rely on a right of self-defence or on a state of necessity in order to preclude the wrongfulness of the construction of the wall, and that such construction and its associated rgime were accordingly contrary to international law.
The Court concluded by observing that the construction of the wall must be placed in a more general context, noting the obligation on Israel and Palestine to comply with international humanitarian law, as well as the need for implementation in good faith of all relevant Security Council resolutions, and drawing the attention of the General Assembly to the need for efforts to be encouraged with a view to achieving a negotiated solution to the outstanding problems on the basis of international law and the establishment of a Palestinian State.
3a8082e126