At Volokh, but it is Josh Blackman, who I think one of the weaker and distinctly more Trump-friendly, reporting Vance saying:You cannot have a country where the American people keep on electing immigration enforcement and the courts tell the American people they're not allowed to have what they voted for.
This is wrong - at least in theory. The USA has a constitution, and people can vote for who they like, that doesn't change it. Of course if a sufficient supermajority wants a thing, then the constitution can be changed; but that isn't so in this case. "Does the majority get what it wants" is a recurring theme in political philosophy of course; see for example In a democracy, when and where should majorities rule? or Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson.
Of course, how it plays out politcially is a different matter. Vance is trying to push for what he wants, disguised as some kind of principle. JB, ditto.
Refs
* Court Grants WilmerHale Law Firm Injunction Against President Trump's Executive Order Targeting Firm.
* How Fast is the World Warming?
* The History of English Law before the Time of Edward I.
* Sorry, I Still Think MR Is Wrong About USAID - ACX.
* We Won Our Tariff Case! - EV. Timmy is weaselly, but apparently rejects the constitution, insofar as I can parse him.
21 comments:
They want to do what they want and not be hampered by existing laws, the Constitution, the courts and judges. They're already doing it, blatantly ignoring decisions they don't like, from federal judges and the Supreme Court. They're pretending the US has "emergencies" on immigrants and on energy, so ignoring the requirement for warrants, due process and climate and environmental regulations passed by Congress. It's really hard to believe. And there seems nothing half of Americans can do about it. Trump/Vance are destroying America, destroying its laws and values. Why? Project 2025, I know, but why did they come to be? From the Heritage Foundation. But why did Trump/Vance buy into it so readily (even though during the campaign Trump said he knew nothing of Project 2025, which was a bald-faced lie). Why did the Heritage Foundation? But what fifth column is behind all this, behind the Heritage Foundation and behind Trump? It honestly seems like they are directing Trump to destroy the US. Not kidding. The more this goes on the more I think there are very dark forces underneath all this.
Which has a poorer record--the Congress or the electorate? Neither have distinguished themselves. Immigration is not a national emergency in the USA. Deporting millions of them may well initiate one. Congress blithely succumbs to Trump. But the electorate isn't exactly up in arms about it, either.
Tom: for sure. Half of US voters are immoral idiots.
I disagree vehemently with you. Maybe 15% are truly MAGAts. The others are just Republicans who really, really don't like us Democrats or the things we espouse. They're just on the other side of the fence.
Vehemently??
Yes. Demonizing opponents is what killed the climate conversation--and others. I know lots of Republicans. Perfectly sane and intelligent people who disagree with me on a number of important issues. You disagree with me on a number of important issues, too. Should I start calling you names?
I too am against demonising opponents (see-also https://mustelid.blogspot.com/2021/07/book-review-righteous-mind.html). I'm also against despair (https://mustelid.blogspot.com/2023/10/gray-sinner.html). You need more-than-half-America on your side; don't put them off.
Populism seems to be popular. Alas the Dems are populist themselves (they have no answer on tariffs, for example, other than "yes we like tariffs too but we'd just do them a bit differently") and other than opposing MAGA (by which I mean just disagreeing with it) they don't seem to have anything positive and sensible to say. I do so wish they could just back off all the woke crap and the ridiculous over-regulation and make some friends.
The people in favour of small govt, at least nominally, were the Repubs; now they've kinda sneakily stolen the Dems territory.
> They want to do what they want and not be hampered by existing laws
This describes everyone. The constitution is supposed to have checks and balances; Congress is supposed to be an important part of that, but is now seen to have weakened over the past few decades into gerontocratic mediocraties mostly interested in hanging on to their sinecure; they are supposed to be jealous of their power.
I agree with 100% of your last comment. That kinda scares me.
Trump is immoral and committing immoral actions. Anyone who supports him knowing this is accepting immorality. That makes them immoral.
You're being kind of tough on what I consider the majority of Republicans, who either don't think Trump's immorality has been proven or that it is relevant to governance in terms of his actions in the private sphere. I think Trump is immoral. But then I would--I think Bush was immoral too. I'm a Democrat. But I have learned not to judge too quickly those who don't see the brilliance of my thinking.
I can agree that Trump is immoral, and that people supporting immoral causes or persons share in and contribute to that immorality.
But I disagree with David on two fronts. The first is the apparent binary moral / immoral; life isn't like that, people aren't like that, things are more complex.
The second is the focus on Trump / MAGA. There's plenty of "immorality" in the Dems and elsewhere; see for a start my comment above.
'The "Smash the American economy because poverty will make people remember how much they love being white" party Vs. The "Never let anyone do anything, because someone might profit from it" party. Never say America doesn't have real political choice!!!'
(from here) is a caricature of both but illustrative.
Back on the ground, have you climbed in the Blatten area?
The seismic alarm bell tinkled a bit weeks ago as quake swarms lit up in the Aegean and the Tyrrhenian - I notified a Greek friend with a chalet a couple of Alps away but the mountain collapse details seem to have been buried in the Climate Crisis Shock Horror ledes
We went up to Konkordiaplatz years back and then down through the Lotschental. Perhaps three decades ago.
William wrote:
"There's plenty of "immorality" in the Dems and elsewhere; see for a start my comment above."
What "immoralities" from the Democrats are even close to those now being committed by Trump?
This is the kind of false negation progressives love to inflict on themselves.
Tom wrote:
"You're being kind of tough on what I consider the majority of Republicans, who either don't think Trump's immorality has been proven or that it is relevant to governance in terms of his actions in the private sphere."
I don't believe this at all.
88% of Republicans support Trump:
https://www.newsmax.com/us/trump-approval-rating-economy/2025/06/02/id/1213290/
That's from the latest "monthly" poll, but of course they don't date it:
https://johnzogbystrategies.com/president-trumps-approval-rating-at-48-49-disapprove-according-to-new-poll-by-john-zogby-strategies-boosted-by-strong-support-on-immigration-and-government-cost-cutting/
88% support Trump's immoral behavior and actions. That makes them immoral too. They are ruining America, and not even smart enough to realize it.
William wrote:
"The constitution is supposed to have checks and balances; Congress is supposed to be an important part of that, but is now seen to have weakened over the past few decades into gerontocratic mediocraties mostly interested in hanging on to their sinecure; they are supposed to be jealous of their power."
We are very well aware of this. But Congress has been captured by MAGAts. SCOTUS too. What do you expect the rest of America to do? March on Congress with machine guns?
Like I said before, I dislike your sorting people into binary "moral" and "immoral" categories based on who they support politically. Indeed, if I was to use your categorisation system, I'd be forced to put you into the "immoral" category for similar reasons. I also don't see how you can consider it helpful, except possibly to make you by comparison feel good about your own morality; but that kind of self-congratulatory stuff is bad.
While Trump, and the MAGA folk, are responsible for their own sins, I find the Dems guilty of failing to provide an acceptable alternative.
I don't think MAGA has captured Congress, and certainly not SCOTUS; the latter is one of your - indeed the world's - best institutions; one of the Dems many sins is their reckless disparagement of it. Few in Congress are really MAGA; they are just faking it, to keep their jobs; the problem is the voters. Who seem so pissed off with the established order that they are prepared to burn everything down in the vain hope of getting something better.
William M. Connolley said...
"While Trump, and the MAGA folk, are responsible for their own sins, I find the Dems guilty of failing to provide an acceptable alternative."
What? An alternative to fascism? Obviously it's the pre-existing democratic republic.
If you didn't hear Kamala Harris defending that you weren't listening.
Trump is a unique threat to the United States. But you want to play the game of "both sides are responsible." It's a cop-out to excuse authoritarianism. For, what exactly?
Sadly--very sadly--you are both correct as far as you go. The Democratic leadership is pathetic and has been for a generation. We Dems are lions led by donkeys (where have I heard that before?). We at the moment have no coherent program and even our 'organized' resistance to the Trump regime is... well, I already used the word pathetic. And yet... the Democratic party and the millions it claims to represent are far, far better than the Trump regime and the faux Republicans they oppose. Trump is not Hitler. He is, however, a wannabe Franco. And plenty of those with him are fully aware and fully on board with this.
Tom: Now that I definitely agree with. I usually vote Democratic, but have never been a member of any political party. Any party that can't make a strong case for itself in the presence of Trump and MAGA Republicans is certainly impotent and, yes, part of the swamp and corruption in DC.
Post a Comment