walterolson.bsky.social profile picture

Walter Olson @walterolson.bsky.social

Just out from me at Cato: in its case against Maryland federal judges, the Trump administration is advancing the dangerous and open-ended argument that legal checks on a president's actions "diminish the votes of the citizens who elected him." Whoa! /1

The administration is arguing that when courts restrain Donald Trump’s actions in the name of the law, they “diminish the votes of the citizens who elected him” as a “representative of the people” wie...

Do Legal Checks on a President’s Power “Diminish the Votes of the Citizens Who Elected Him”?

The administration is arguing that when courts restrain Donald Trump’s actions in the name of the law, they “diminish the votes of the citizens who elected him” as a “representative of the people” wie...
19
walterolson.bsky.social profile picture

Walter Olson @walterolson.bsky.social

I quote Paul Clement's terrific memorandum on behalf of the Maryland judges in rebuttal of that notion: "In reality, it is the enduring text of the Constitution, not the preference of voters at a moment in time, that establishes the powers of the three branches of the federal government." /2

Replies

  1. walterolson.bsky.social profile picture

    Walter Olson @walterolson.bsky.social

    The voting public has an interest - call it a mandate - in “seeing its governmental institutions follow the law.” What's more, while the Executive does have an interest in enforcing the nation’s immigration laws, its "paramount interest is the same as the judiciary’s: that justice shall be done.” /3

    2