While the video below isn’t directly related to the subject, it does have the flavor (3 minutes)
Republicans are great with little bumper sticker slogans. A few words that seemingly mean something almost as a guide for their actions. Sort of today’s version of “wise old sayings.” Someone makes up such a saying, it gets slapped on a bumper sticker and is then repeated ad infinitum by Republican candidates who have absolutely no intention to live by these words.
“Rule of Law” is one such phrase. This is a phrase that we have been exposed to for who knows how long. Hs it been since Reagan? Or was it something created to imply that President Clinton was a law ignorer?
Whatever caused the birth of this phrase, Republicans have ridden it hard while ignoring it themselves for the most part. The implication of the phrase is that those mouthing this phrase – frequently – are those who live by it. These are the people that follow the rule of law. Evidence comes down hard that the Republican Party uses this phrase only as a prop.
We see people like Chuck Grassley ignoring the dictates of the constitution on the appointment of judges. We see congress members like Duncan Hunter literally thumbing their noses at campaign laws to dip into the cash for a high life style.
What Republicans mean by their little phrase is that they will throw the book at marginalized groups. If a person has enough money Republicans can be quite accommodating as we have seen throughout this administration.
It is almost as if this week Republicans want to illustrate just how they really view “rule of law.” The stories coming from south Florida and the Miami Herald about how the “rule of law” was bent to favor a very rich Jeffrey Epstein are overwhelming. Yet as overwhelming as the Epstein revelations have been, we also have the current president ready to defy a decision by the Supreme Court.
As most know, when the Supreme Court ended their session at the end of June, one of their very last decisions concerned whether a citizenship question should be included on the 2020 census. In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court ruled that NO such a question should be on the census form.
The administration has refused to accept that ruling and appears poised to begin printing the forms with the question included. So we have a constitutional crisis – the executive branch thought the president plans to defy the judicial branch and its decision that the citizenship question on the census is not legal.
Once again the current president has moved this country into unknown territory by refusing to follow the law. Will the executive branch defy the Court and print the census questionnaires with the illegal question? If so, how could the judiciary possibly stop it? Could the Court stop the distribution? The president will be pushing for this to come to an impasse believing that the judicial branch will back down. (ed. note: The current president has withdrawn his threat to ignore this ruling for the present time.)
Whereas on one hand the current administration has chosen to defy Court orders, on the other hand the administration has chosen to use the judicial system to accomplish one of their wet dream goals of the past 10 years. That is ending the ACA.
After failing to end the ACA through the normal means – legislatively – Republicans have teen to the path of trying to end it through a court decision. A three judge appellate court in the 5th circuit (Texas area) is now hearing the case that turns on whether the mandate for having insurance is still valid due to changes in tax laws passed by Republicans in December 2017 and signed into law.
A group of Republican governors and state attorney generals are behind this suit. The panel chosen to hear the case appears to be hand-picked to destroy the ACA. Should this happen the Republicans will be using the judiciary to do what they couldn’t do. Very possibly the question will end up before the Supreme Court again. This time there will be different players on the Court.
We could go into a long discussion of the ACA and SCOTUS, but the point is that the party of the “Rule of Law” is really the party that is determined to do whatever it damn well pleases no matter what. This makes the constitution not worth the paper it is written on.
Prior to the current administration we had leaders who would restrain themselves from stepping into the realm of the other two branches. Stepping over the invisible boundaries would break down the unwritten barriers that have kept our constitution as the supreme law and kept the concept of checks and balances from keeping one branch take over.
The current president could care less about boundaries and barriers and he especially doesn’t’t care about checks and balances. He cares about power and accumulating power into his office. The current president is slowly leading the country toward destroying the very foundations of our democracy.
“Rule of Law?” Isn’t that for little people?