Trump's Dangerous Disregard for the Courts

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
79,973
Reaction score
41,811
Points
2,605
Location
In a Republic, actually
ā€˜In Marbury v. Madison (1803), Chief Justice John Marshall declared that ā€œit is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law isā€ā€”and, he might have added, for the other branches of government to accept the courtā€™s judgment as authoritative, even when they disagree with it.
[ā€¦]
The core problem with Mr. Trumpā€™s understanding of the Constitution goes even deeper. During his first term, he told an audience at an event: ā€œI have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.ā€ Article II gives a president broad powers, but Mr. Trumpā€™s comment amounts to saying that a presidentā€™s decisions take precedence over those of the Article III branch (the judiciary) and the Article I branch (Congress). Much of what Mr. Trump has done in the early months of his second term rests on this proposition, which runs counter to the theory and letter of the Constitution. Congress and the judiciary are coordinate, not subordinate, branches of our government.

Mr. Trumpā€™s approach represents the danger against which James Madison warned in Federalist No. 47: ā€œThe accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.ā€ When executive orders supersede legislation and judges are threatened with impeachment for doing their jobs, this could be the eventual result.ā€™


Trump is indeed the very definition of tyranny ā€“ arrogant, authoritarian, anti-democratic, with contempt for the rule of law and Constitution.
 
ā€˜In ā€œit is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law isā€ā€”and, he might have added, for the other branches of government to accept the courtā€™s judgment as authoritative, even when they disagree with it.

Very convenient, Celia , when it is used for manipulating the ways in which you might arrange the composition of the judiciary .

Very convenient as a way to overlook the obviously corrupt practises .

Away with your Fake Moralising
 
You didn't bawl when Biden ignored SCOTUS on student loans did you?
lie. You know he followed the ruling because his subsequent actions were not challenged in court. He reduced the scope of his loan forgiveness to what they told him he could do.
 
lie. You know he followed the ruling because his subsequent actions were not challenged in court. He reduced the scope of his loan forgiveness to what they told him he could do.
Agendas that are artificial are destined to end in disaster.
 
Back
Top Bottom