Saw it phrased best by some opinion piece: “Because the courts don’t have a standing army to enforce orders, they have no recourse.”
Which is fucking terrifying. Something that I’ve not really considered before I suppose.
Founders should’ve given the courts an army
The founders didn’t even want to give the country a standing army. What precedent is there, contemporary or modern, where the judicial has its own direct enforcement arm?
In theory, police fill this role…it’s kind of in the name “law enforcement.” But in practice they are something else, they can be captured and corrupted like anyone else.
In theory, the military swears an oath to defend the Constitution. The Secretary of the Navy could decide, for instance, to order a military coup, storm the White House with Marines, and arrest Trump, Musk, et al. But this is extremely risky, both in tactical terms and in public image. At the end of the day, The People elected Trump, and they would be dishonoring that essential choice. Unless Trump does something like send B-52s to carpet bomb Los Angeles, the military will be determined to stay apolitical.
You’re all looking for some play-by-play guidebook or ruleset in breaking the rules. You will not find one, it is an oxymoron. The founders risked arrest and death by hanging by setting this country in motion, they were not following the rules either. I obviously won’t extol their moral character in whole, but they knew that the divine right of kings was wrong and that representative government was the future, and they acted upon these beliefs.
In theory, this is what the “unorganized militia” is for. A.k.a. you and me and every other able-bodied adult male.
The speed of change isn’t the problem. A functional court system can strike down these executive orders as fast as Trump can sign them. It’s not like he blinks and the world just changes around him.
The problem twofold:
One is that our founding fathers didn’t properly balance the three branches of government. WIthout giving the Supreme Court a method of enforcement, they always have been little more than an advisory panel. It’s only held up for 200 years because the Supreme Court gave themselves at least some of the power the founding fathers should have given in the first place and a gentleman’s agreement not to rock the boat which somehow managed to hold for 200 years.
The second is that our founding fathers really didn’t give any guidance about what to do if even one of the three branches of government goes rogue, let alone all three. They gave absolutely no guidance about what to do when that gentleman’s agreement doesn’t hold up. They gave absolutely no answer to the question of “I’ll do what I want, what are you going to do about it?”
And here we are, being led by a man who is literally pissing on the Constitution and asking what anyone’s going to do about it, and the answer he’s getting is a whole lot of “Nothing.”
Bro, they gave us the guidance. They fought a revolutionary war to be free from government tyranny. Trump and the oligarchs are leaving us no other option besides a new revolution.
I thought the guidance was the 2nd amendment?
The answer is violence.
2a
The first amendment is kind of about our ability to openly say “time to use the second amendment”.
Why does the Department of Justice falls under the executive?
Supposed to be separation of powers, Judiciary is supposed to just look at evidence and make judgement calls, the executive is supposed to do the legwork to actually bring that evidence to the courts. If the Judiciary is the ones collecting evidence and making the judgement calls as to what will and won’t support a particular position, that’s a bad thing.
Unfortunately that separation of power breaks down when fascists controll most/all the levers of power.
The solution, perhaps, is to make the DoJ independent
And what does an independent DoJ look like to you?
You need to fight them in the mud where they want to be. Quit trying to take the high road
