Weirdness Prevails: Trump and His Critics:
Peter Schultz
Things are
really getting weird in Trumpland because those who style themselves
“progressives” are attacking Trump for undermining the rule of law. Why is this
weird? Because progressivism and its originators – T. Roosevelt, Woodrow
Wilson, and FDR – deliberately jettisoned the rule of law as inadequate,
pre-modern, and unable to support the kind of active, interventionist
government needed in the modern world. The Progressives embraced three kinds of
power, military power, bureaucratic power, and presidential power. And they
recognized that by doing so, they were “modifying,” even undermining the rule
of law.
Central to
Teddy Roosevelt’s “stewardship theory” of presidential power, as well as FDR’s New
Deal, was the creation of a new kind of politics, the kind that transcended
legal concepts and law itself. In a real sense, this is what the “modern
presidency” was – and is – all about, liberating presidents from the confines
of the law, whether that law is statutory or constitutional.
Military
power is, obviously, beyond the rule of law. Making war puts a nation beyond,
well beyond the rule of law, which is why the Constitution allows the
government to suspend the writ of habeas corpus in time of war. As Justice
Jackson said in his concurring opinion in Korematsu,
the case where the Supreme Court upheld FDR’s decision to authorize the
“internment” of all persons of Japanese descent, including natural born
American citizens, presidents are obligated in time of war to be super vigilant
in protecting the nation and, hence, were not bound by legal principles, by the
rule of law.
Drone
assassinations, including those of American citizens, torture, Guantanamo, in
fact the entire war on terror so readily embraced by the Bush administration
and the American people, make a
mockery of the rule of law. This is what Cheney meant when he said we had to go
to “the dark side” after 9/11. Of course, we had already gone to the dark side
in Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Guatemala, Chile, and Iran, long before the war on
terror was declared.
Embracing
bureaucracy, as the Progressives openly and eagerly did, also undermines the
rule of law. Bureaucratic government, bureaucratic institutions are alternatives
to the rule of law, which FDR knew and which was central to his New Deal. The rejection of the rule of
law was then close to the heart of the New Deal and was what helped make that
deal new. The old deal was the
Constitution and especially its separation of powers and the rule of law.
Bureaucracies are not bound by legal reasoning, as reflected by the enormous
discretion they are entrusted with. For the Progressives, such discretion was
seen as indispensable for what they called “good government,” that is,
efficient, flexible, but not law bound government.
And on top
of this, the Progressives embraced presidential power, both its bureaucratic
and its “monarchical” characteristics, amounting to a wholesale rejection of
the rule of law. Teddy Roosevelt’s embrace of presidential power, his
“stewardship theory,” encouraged presidents to do anything they thought necessary for the well-being of the nation,
including confiscating private property or, a la FDR, “interning” persons, even
American citizens, who had done nothing illegal. It is only a short step from
such a theory of presidential power to “interning” even children separated from
their parents. And it is no step at all to creating a “Security Index,” a la J.
Edgar Hoover, composed of the names of persons to be “interned” whenever the
government decided it was necessary to do so. This makes a mockery of the claim
that the U.S. is “a nation of laws.”
So, if
Trump were guilty of undermining the rule of law as claimed, that would make
him just like the Progressives. Which of course makes a mockery of those
progressives who argue that Trump should be impeached for doing so because,
once Trump is gone, these same people will embrace any president who continues
and even expands the war on terror, who continues and even fortifies the
“imperial presidency,” just like Reagan did and just like Bush Jr. did. The
charges against Trump for undermining the rule of law are, of course, bogus
coming from those who call themselves “progressives.” Those making the charges
are being hypocritical, dishonest, and disingenuous.
And insofar
as this is true, the attempt to impeach Trump looks more and more like a good,
old-fashioned coup, dressed up to look like something else. But as the old expression
has it, even if you put make-up, earrings, and a dress on a pig, it’s still a
pig. It’s hard to hide a coup. Just ask Bill Clinton.
-->
No comments:
Post a Comment