Trump’s national emergency to build his border wall is the most autocratic move of his presidency.
Popular in News & Politics
- Seriously, Congress Has Been Even More Embarrassing Than Usual Lately
- Why Netanyahu’s War Cabinet Is Existentially Divided
- Evidence Is Building That Samuel Alito’s Brain Is Filled to the Brim With Right-Wing Internet Chum
- The DOJ Is Making a Huge Mistake Censoring a Journalist Who Embarrassed Fox News
Donald Trump has now been the president of the United States for two years, and many of the most sensational predictions for his time in office have not come to pass. The press remains rambunctious. Americans aren’t scared to criticize the president. Courts continue to rule against the White House with reassuring regularity. Elections are, as the Democrats’ big victory in the midterm elections strikingly demonstrated, still free. So perhaps those of us who have warned about the president’s authoritarian ambitions really have, as a prominent conservative told me during a recent TV debate, been suffering from a bad case of Trump Derangement Syndrome all along?
The president’s intention to issue an executive order declaring a national emergency at the southern border suggests otherwise. In fact, it is hard to imagine a clearer piece of evidence that he really does seek unconstitutional powers: If Trump’s past attacks on the legislature and the judiciary have, at times, felt like a drill, his intention to arrogate vast powers to himself under an utterly transparent pretext is the real deal.
Americans often like to imagine that their system of checks and balances is a secure bulwark against the threat of autocracy. But in reality, no set of political institutions is, in and of itself, enough to constrain a popular and power-hungry president intent on destroying the republic. One of the reasons for this is the classic problem of the state of emergency, with which political philosophers and students of the law have grappled ever since the Roman Republic.
As Cicero argued in De Legibus, the safety of the people is the highest law; when a polity faces some unforeseen emergency, there may thus be urgent and legitimate need to loosen some of the ordinary legal restrictions on the powers of the highest magistrate. At the same time, it is obvious that any legal recognition of the need for emergency powers creates a huge opportunity for abuse; if an aspiring autocrat declares a false emergency, he would instantly be liberated from the usual constraints on his power. The history of the 20thcentury demonstrates that this is no abstract concern: From Adolf Hitler in Germany to Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, some of the most brutal dictators of the past hundred years have consolidated their power by exploiting emergency legislation.
Advertisement Advertisement Advertisement Advertisement Trump’s incompetence should make us all the more concerned about the long-term threat to American democracy.It would be tempting to think that a similar course of action would be impossible in the United States because the Constitution creates such potent limits on the power of the president. But the differences between the powers that American presidents have traditionally exercised during states of emergencies and those granted by the infamous Article 48 of the Constitution of the Weimar Republic are a matter of degree, not of kind. As a recent article in the Atlanticargues, President Trump could “do all kinds of extraordinary things” by declaring a national state of emergency, “from seizing control of the internet to declaring martial law.”
If American democracy has enjoyed astounding longevity, then, it is because two key safeguards have historically ensured that presidents have not arrogated tyrannical powers to themselves. The first is that American citizens have long had a strong commitment to democratic values, which made them very reluctant to vote for candidates who displayed authoritarian tendencies. A few presidents, like Andrew Jackson, have been elected as strongmen with a dubious commitment to the rule of law. Others, like Richard Nixon, have bristled against constraints on their power in the (imagined) privacy of the Oval Office. But the vast majority have not abused emergency powers, or played other forms of extreme “constitutional hardball,” because they had a deep commitment to preserving the republic.
Advertisement AdvertisementThe second is that the president’s counterparts in Congress have, in the past, made it clear that they would stand up to him if he overstepped the constitutional boundaries of the executive in a blatant manner. Perhaps the most impressive instance of this came when Franklin Delano Roosevelt, understandably frustrated by the Supreme Court’s string of rulings against the New Deal, threatened to pack the court; even though he was extremely popular, some of his closest allies in the Senate made clear that they would refuse to confirm his nominees. Though FDR might have tried to pass the same legislation under the pretext of a national emergency, this effectively demonstrated how high a political price he would have had to pay for infringing on the powers traditionally enjoyed by Congress or the Supreme Court—and he mostly desisted from further attempts to undermine other branches of government.
Advertisement AdvertisementThese two key safeguards are now failing. For one, no successful candidate for the highest office in the land has ever attacked the very idea of legitimate political competition as openly and blatantly as Donald Trump. From his call to lock up his chief political opponent to his constant denunciation of independent judges and critical members of Congress, his desire for unconstrained power is in scary evidence.
Advertisement AdvertisementFor another, it is hard to recall a juncture in American history in which the president’s congressional supporters have been so willing to do his bidding. Mitch McConnell is an especially striking study in the dereliction of duty. Over the past weeks, the Senate majority leader has made clear that declaring a state of national emergency over the southern border would constitute an abuse of presidential powers. When, on Thursday, Trump announced his intention to declare a national emergency over—let’s see—the southern border, McConnell immediately vowed his support.
AdvertisementAs I have argued before, the most powerful—as well as the most poorly understood—trick in the populist’s toolkit is the ability to engage in “salami tactics.” When they set out to expand their power, populists usually do so one small slice at a time, issuing false pretexts for executive action and fake reasons for the “reform” of independent institutions. As a result, no single action by the executive seems like an existential threat to the rule of law. Without any clear moment of juncture, the system of checks and balances slowly decays.
What is striking about Trump’s intention to declare a state of emergency for such transparently fraudulent reasons is that he isn’t even bothering to engage in salami tactics. This is about as clear an attack on the constitutional order as political scientists could have dreamed up for some in-class exercise on the rise of dictatorship. If Republican senators like Mitt Romney and Ben Sasse are not willing to stand up to Trump’s cheap power grab now, they never will. And if the president’s many opponents cannot take to the streets to oppose his autocratic tendencies at this juncture, it is clear that they won’t do so until it’s far too late.
Advertisement Advertisement AdvertisementTo be sure, none of this means that Trump is likely to follow in the footsteps of Ferdinand Marcos, or even Viktor Orbán. If there’s one thing that the past two years have demonstrated, it is that Trump lacks the vision or the discipline of most of the authoritarian populists who have successfully bent their countries’ institutions to their will. If there was a populist Olympics, Donald Trump would not make medal rank.
But Trump’s incompetence should make us all the more concerned about the long-term threat to American democracy. An evidently erratic and highly unpopular American president is about to declare a national emergency on grounds that everyone knows to be spurious. And yet, it is likely that he will experience only the mildest blowback from his political allies. What does that tell us about the damage that a shrewd and popular president with the capacity to follow the increasingly sophisticated playbook of authoritarian populism could inflict—especially if he could consolidate his powers under the cover of an actual emergency?
Tweet Share Share Comment下一篇:Wordle today: The answer and hints for August 29
- ·Europe now has a huge AI gap, for better or for worse
- ·三星w689软件在哪里下载(三星w689软件在哪里下载)
- ·步步高怎么设置壁纸整个画面(步步高k201的手机壁纸桌面弄成全屏的)
- ·BBK K201手机主题下载地址!手机里也有不需要上网的游戏下载地址
- ·Top 10 Most Significant Nvidia GPUs of All Time
- ·步步高怎么设置壁纸整个画面(步步高k201的手机壁纸桌面弄成全屏的)
- ·BBK K201可以安装2009版吗?
- ·新生儿保险有哪些种类(新生儿保险有哪些)
- ·NYT mini crossword answers for August 29
- ·步步高K201(步步高K201有trackid吗)
- ·怎么在微信查询个人社保(怎么在微信查询个人社保信息)
- ·网上查询征信次数多了有影响吗(征信查询次数过多到底有什么影响)
- ·Courting Disaster
- ·借呗不能用了多久能恢复(借呗不能用了大概多长时间可以恢复)
- ·新生儿保险有哪些种类(新生儿保险有哪些)
- ·步步高k201手机(步步高K201的播放软件或者其他软件知道的麻烦告诉下)
- ·The OLED Burn
- ·vivox20鎵嬫満灏哄(步步高K201是智能手机吗外观尺寸是多少谢谢````)
- ·上市公司造假会被处罚吗(上市公司造假会被退市吗)
- ·浦发信用卡刷卡失败是什么原因(信用卡刷卡失败是什么原因)
- ·A Journey Into the Mind of Stephen King
- ·浦发信用卡刷卡失败是什么原因(信用卡刷卡失败是什么原因)
- ·BBK k201在上网的时候如何建立一个小文字的网页?
- ·步步高k202哪里能买到(各位:前两天我买了个步步高K201手机,花了1200元,现在在网上查,报 ...)
- ·雅安公安接连破获两起汉源湖非法捕捞案
- ·步步高手机内存老是不足怎么办(步步高手机上网总是出现内存不足)
- ·DNC 2024 speech: Barack Obama and Michelle Obama have a superpower no other Democrat has.
- ·步步高音乐手机的主题曲(知道K201的步步高音乐手机主题从哪下么)
- ·申请低保要查全家明细吗(申请低保要查全家卡吗)
- ·步步高手机内存老是不足怎么办(步步高手机上网总是出现内存不足)
- ·CrowdStrike outage is still causing hundreds of flight cancellations daily
- ·步步高主板坏了,有没有修的必要了?(步步高K201主板坏了还值得修吗)
- ·借呗不能用于投资吗(借呗不能用于投资吗)
- ·京东plus会员怎么开通(京东PLUS会员怎么开通)
- ·Unionized hospital workers pull out from strike
- ·姝ユ楂樼函闊充箰mp3(步步高音乐手机K201怎么下载小说)