You might want to take a look at Part 1 of this blog entry as
it relates to majority/minority rule. It
gives a little background on how Donald Trump lost the election and still ended
up President of the United States, but now more civics…
One of the things that The Donald and his staff have screamed
about, more loudly and harshly than almost anything, is how the Courts have
stymied their efforts to do things. He
is right, they are doing exactly that, and that is, more importantly, their
job!
The Courts; that allegedly despotic, black-robed,
appointed-for-life, group of bastards, is in the business of making sure that
the majority does not trample the rights of minorities and that the Executive does
not violate the law by use of the executive power of the presidency. The majority, in this case is the Government,
in spite of the fact that Donald Trump was elected by a minority of the popular
vote (see Part 1). The Courts are
designed to protect us from our government.
Much to The Donald’s chagrin, the Courts are in the business of limiting
Government authority, something an autocratic, corporate-thinker like The
Donald despises. He is used to telling
people to jump and having them ask, “How high?” while on the way up. The Courts telling him what he can and cannot
do is anathema to this dictatorial way of thinking.
If you think about it, we have in The Constitution, the Bill
of Rights. The Bill of Rights was made
part of the Constitution because people were distrustful of the Government,
having just separated from the rule of a King with absolute authority purportedly
handed down from God. It was
specifically designed to prevent the abuses of the people by the government and
more specifically the president. The
First Amendment prevented “We the People” from being suppressed in expressing
our opinions. The Second Amendment prevented the government from disarming the
citizenry and stopping the kind of rebellion we had recently fought to win our
independence. You will recall that the
British Army had made efforts to disarm the colonists in 1774 – ’75. The result, the Second Amendment. All of the Amendments in the Bill of Rights
have a basis in the government abuses of power against the citizens, at the
time the British Crown.
We can draw a few conclusions here. Since the Courts are responsible for
protecting the rights of the minority and the people in general from them, the
majority and the government might well be a bit miffed that they are being
prevented from doing what they want to do.
This is to be expected, and if the majority and Executive are not
screaming, then probably the Courts are not doing their jobs. The Donald believes himself to be the only one with all the answers and anyone
that disagrees with him is, at best, an idiot.
In another society, The Donald is the kind of person that would do a
number of things to prevent obstruction of his benevolent dictatorship; declare
a state of emergency, martial law and jailing anyone who dissents. It is the self-fulfilling rubric of
paternalism. I know what’s best, so
anyone that prevents me from doing what I want to do is un-American.
There are those that believe that The Donald is acting to
oppress and trample the Constitutional Rights of a minority and exceeding his
authority as president. Members of that
minority went to Court and the Courts have basically said two things; first, we
believe that the plaintiffs are likely to prevail in proving that the Executive
Branch has violated the rights of the plaintiffs and/or exceeded his authority
and/or encroached on the authority of another branch of government; second, that
the damages are likely permanent and irreparable. Thus, the Court issued a temporary injunction
preventing the Executive Branch from continuing these practices, at least until
the case can be argued more fully, or appealed to higher Court.
It is important to note a few things about the process
itself. The plaintiffs in the case filed
suit. The defendants, in this case the
Government of the United States, and more specifically, the Executive Branch
and the Trump Administration, were served a copy of the allegations as to why
the Executive Order violated either the Constitution or existing law. The Government then had the opportunity to
make its case in opposition. The case
was heard by a Judge, who, after hearing both sides of the case, made the
decision regarding the injunction. What
The Donald does not appreciate, and stridently objects to is the fact that
someone had the temerity to tell him, “No!”
The Donald believes that no one
tells The Donald “No!”
The tantrum being thrown by the Trump Administration is all
about whose ox is being gored. The
Donald absolutely hates all things Obama, so he has virtually repealed
everything he can repeal by Executive Order.
The Trump Administration has been defined by his negative actions. He has negated by executive fiat, everything
he can manage to undo that was done in the eight years before, but that is not
what has really gotten him in legal trouble with the Courts. It is when he actually does something that gets him in trouble with the Courts. When he takes action to discriminate against
and ban Muslims, regardless of what he calls it, he goes too far and the Courts
say, nope, can’t do that.
Throughout history, some of the worst atrocities committed
have been those by the majority against a minority, often in the form of a majority-elected
government. We have the most striking
example in this country the enslavement of blacks and later the prejudice and
discrimination that many argue has not, to this day, ended. The laws that were used to enforce this
discrimination are seemingly endless. Hell, The Constitution of the United
States used the formula that enslaved persons would be determined to be 3/5 of
the non-slave population for purposes of representation. This is not quite the 3/5 of a man it has
been been interpreted to be, but clearly it was an incredible, and today
unconscionable, discrimination against blacks. While it was the Civil War and Congress that legally ended slavery, it
was the Courts that started the ball rolling on ending racial discrimination.
The Courts themselves have made some unconscionable decisions,
chief among them, the Dred Scott decision
in 1857 (arguably a decision that helped give us the Civil War) and Plessy vs. Ferguson in 1896, both of
which tried to maintain the status quo of slavery and later separation of the
races in education. Much to their
credit, however, they have also made some of the greatest decisions,
overturning their previous actions.
Notable among these was Brown vs.
Board of Education in 1954.
Our civics lesson takes us now to math. The Brown decision was made in 1954. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was, well,
1964. The Congress of the United States
would take a decade to pass legislation the Courts had pretty much already
started. I am sure there are lawyers
among my readers that will be able to provide more and better examples.
The point of all this explanation and education is that the
Courts exist to protect the rights of minorities that the majority is trying to
oppress. The Courts are intended to act
as a check on the Executive, to prevent people like Donald Trump from engaging
in practices that, if allowed to go unchecked, I believe present a real,
present and existential threat to the United States as a democracy. Like any bully called to account by an adult
or authority, the bully throws a tantrum, just like The Donald has on several
occasions.
No comments:
Post a Comment