Thanks Gabe for continuing to provide an 'adult' analysis of what is going on. No whining, no hand wringing, just well researched commentaire on the impact and possible, even probable consequences of events!
You are not often fun to read but you are definitely a must read!
Could you not call musk an “efficiency czar”? America doesn’t have czars. Let’s not lend legitimacy to what is purely an ego driven word.
Two, there’s nothing efficient about his actions. He is deliberately ransacking government wide data. Please describe him as what he is - a South African Nazi. Or - trump’s pet. Or - the head of the bogus department known as DOGE.
Trumps pet? You mean Trump's master. The legal president is clearly showing his mental age. The real President is destroying generations of social programs that makes the US a modern democracy.
I retracted from that phrase also while reading -- i find him more of a usurper. "Czar" implies he was given wide and overarching powers. Isn't the Department of Governmental Efficiency actually an advisory committee, mis-named (because Musk wanted to hype his "DOGE" crypto-currency)?
What is the actual title and assignment for DOGE, and is there anything more to refer to than one Executive Order, ostentatiously signed and displayed by Trump on Inauguration Day?
Crazy to be reading and writing sentences about this stuff. 'END SIMULATION' 😳
I get that we are not there yet, but it is very clear that we might be-- soon. Most alarming IMO is administration officials (including JD) signaling clearly that they may not obey adverse decisions of the federal courts. UNDERSTAND, people: Those decisions can only be enforced by the U.S. Marshall Service, which is within the DOJ. if the DirtyOldRapist directs the AG to not send the Marshalls to assist with enforcing contempt proceedings, the rule of law collapses. The rule of law is the basis of our economy. If this happens, we ALL need to be out in the streets. Many of us can and should be out in the streets before it comes to that, but that will be the point at which we are tipping into the abyss.
Especially from the Vice President of the United States ... second in line to the presidency. And I am not sure Trump will survive the next four years.
Biden also used that rhetoric and Democrats, in general, have been chirping about courts being illegitimate for awhile. It's all dangerous and both sides need to look into the mirror and ask themselves how they got us here.
It is true that some left-wing pundits have called for defiance of court decisions they don't like, and that is bad and dangerous. But I don't recall any instance of Biden or Harris publicly endorsing a pseudo-legal/pseudo-constitutional theory like Vance's that says it's illegitimate for the courts to order the executive to stop doing illegal things. If you have a citation, I'd be interested to see it.
The ERA thing was an empty symbolic gesture that everyone involved knew changed no policy. When student loan forgiveness was struck down, they abided by the decision without suggesting that SCOTUS lacked authority to issue it. Neither of those come even close to asserting the executive's right to ignore the courts as Vance has done.
Because there were specific statutory carve outs that gave him clear discretionary authority to do so in a few relatively small sub-cases. That is worlds different from openly defying the plain language of statutes.
Rhetoric precedes action. It is clear what Trump, Musk and Vance would like to do. And it is pretty clear what they are going to do. A constitutional crisis may not have arrived quite just yet but you can definitely see the whites of its eyes.
From Jan 28: https://williamnfordes.substack.com/p/uncivil-disservice There is NO DOUBT in my mind that this is where we are heading, as in Hitler’s destruction of the courts in his first 100 days in power. See HITLER’S FIRST HUNDRED DAYS, Peter Fritzsche.
People are overlooking the Chief Justice's role in this. Should he take action against the Administration for not enforcing one of its opinions/decisions, that could be a nuclear event within the Court system.
Notably, Chief Justice Roberts touched on this exact possibility in his year end report: “Within the past few years, however, elected officials from across the political spectrum have raised the specter of open disregard for federal court rulings. These dangerous suggestions, however sporadic, must be soundly rejected.” https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2024year-endreport.pdf
What an 'interesting' time we live in. I for one appreciate having your clarifying comments otherwise I might have assumed the administration was already simply ignoring the court orders.
The day-to-day is of course very important. But, I am looking for a book or in-depth article that tries to explain what has happened over the past 8 years since the end of Obama and the start of Trump II? When people look back over the history, were there events (covid in 2020 as opposed to 2019 or 2021), or decisions (Obama pushing Hillary over Biden, or Trump listening to Fauci and sending everyone home) or other events that led to where we are now? Or, are we seeing the results of the right's planning and execution over the years through efforts like the Koch Brothers, the religious right, and otherwise? Or, are we seeing the four years between Trump I and II as a period for unusual planning and efforts by the far right through Project 2025 and otherwise that would not have gotten off the ground if Trump had beaten Biden? The flip side of the question is are the Democrats doing any of the things the right did? Anyhow, looking for some perspective.
Of course we enjoy reading the news four days ahead of time! Thanks for your analyses, so helpful to have some clear-headed thinking about this tumultuous time.
Relevant to all of this discussion is the fact that some years ago an evolution began where the legislative branch of the United States government began to weaken and stop making laws. Instead, too much of the time has been spent in meaningless proclamations that get some debate. It is sad to watch televised statements by members of the House of Representatives and the Senate standing in front of an empty chamber.
Meanwhile, the executive branch, substituting for the legislature, makes often kleptocratic proclamations. These actions seem to please some percentage of the citizen while disappointing and enraging the remaining percentage.
I'm curious. Does the administration "comply" with the courts of they take advantage of the slow pace of justice and simply complete their mission before the final outcome? Because we've seen that already. Does it make it less of a crisis that they usurped the will of the people and constitutional protections "by the rules?"
Thanks for this very clear and entertaining read. The game of talking to two audiences plays out here in the UK too, particularly with immigration. We don't have a written Constitution but we have statutes, treaties, and court precedents arising. Our last Conservative Government was increasingly frustrated at the "pesky kids", our judiciary, ruling against their populist plans to eg deport asylum seekers en masse to Rwanda (an "unsafe" state, in terms of human rights - according to the courts). The right-wing media, which is most of our mainstream press, were calling judges "the enemies of the people". Much noise from politicians about the courts frustrating the will of the majority government. So a quick symbolic majority vote to change the law to say "actually Rwanda is safe, so there". But guess what, the Courts were still going to be the arbiter of whether that new law changed reality, as judged against existing legal standards. Then the Conservatives ran out of time, and lost the general election.
The moral of this UK story is the Populist right over-promised to their supporters, couldn't deliver Rwanda because they did, in fact, have to obey the judicial ruling, and their voters stopped trusting them. Trump seems to be able to deliver much more, for now, and he's more adept at presenting his failures as victories.
Thanks Gabe for continuing to provide an 'adult' analysis of what is going on. No whining, no hand wringing, just well researched commentaire on the impact and possible, even probable consequences of events!
You are not often fun to read but you are definitely a must read!
Thanks!
Thank you so much for reading!
I think it IS fun to read Gabe
Could you not call musk an “efficiency czar”? America doesn’t have czars. Let’s not lend legitimacy to what is purely an ego driven word.
Two, there’s nothing efficient about his actions. He is deliberately ransacking government wide data. Please describe him as what he is - a South African Nazi. Or - trump’s pet. Or - the head of the bogus department known as DOGE.
Words matter.
czar has been a term of art for 'person in change of thing' for decades - accept that the language has moved on.
Thanks for the suggestion but no thanks.
Trumps pet? You mean Trump's master. The legal president is clearly showing his mental age. The real President is destroying generations of social programs that makes the US a modern democracy.
Good point.
I retracted from that phrase also while reading -- i find him more of a usurper. "Czar" implies he was given wide and overarching powers. Isn't the Department of Governmental Efficiency actually an advisory committee, mis-named (because Musk wanted to hype his "DOGE" crypto-currency)?
What is the actual title and assignment for DOGE, and is there anything more to refer to than one Executive Order, ostentatiously signed and displayed by Trump on Inauguration Day?
Crazy to be reading and writing sentences about this stuff. 'END SIMULATION' 😳
I get that we are not there yet, but it is very clear that we might be-- soon. Most alarming IMO is administration officials (including JD) signaling clearly that they may not obey adverse decisions of the federal courts. UNDERSTAND, people: Those decisions can only be enforced by the U.S. Marshall Service, which is within the DOJ. if the DirtyOldRapist directs the AG to not send the Marshalls to assist with enforcing contempt proceedings, the rule of law collapses. The rule of law is the basis of our economy. If this happens, we ALL need to be out in the streets. Many of us can and should be out in the streets before it comes to that, but that will be the point at which we are tipping into the abyss.
It may "only" be rhetoric, but it's extremely dangerous and irresponsible rhetoric at best.
Especially from the Vice President of the United States ... second in line to the presidency. And I am not sure Trump will survive the next four years.
Biden also used that rhetoric and Democrats, in general, have been chirping about courts being illegitimate for awhile. It's all dangerous and both sides need to look into the mirror and ask themselves how they got us here.
It is true that some left-wing pundits have called for defiance of court decisions they don't like, and that is bad and dangerous. But I don't recall any instance of Biden or Harris publicly endorsing a pseudo-legal/pseudo-constitutional theory like Vance's that says it's illegitimate for the courts to order the executive to stop doing illegal things. If you have a citation, I'd be interested to see it.
You mean like student loan forgiveness? Or the ERA is valid actually?
The ERA thing was an empty symbolic gesture that everyone involved knew changed no policy. When student loan forgiveness was struck down, they abided by the decision without suggesting that SCOTUS lacked authority to issue it. Neither of those come even close to asserting the executive's right to ignore the courts as Vance has done.
Biden bragged that SCOTUS couldn’t stop him forgiving student debt.
Because there were specific statutory carve outs that gave him clear discretionary authority to do so in a few relatively small sub-cases. That is worlds different from openly defying the plain language of statutes.
I would say disobeying the courts by the Executive branch is definitely a constitutional crisis.
Rhetoric precedes action. It is clear what Trump, Musk and Vance would like to do. And it is pretty clear what they are going to do. A constitutional crisis may not have arrived quite just yet but you can definitely see the whites of its eyes.
From Jan 28: https://williamnfordes.substack.com/p/uncivil-disservice There is NO DOUBT in my mind that this is where we are heading, as in Hitler’s destruction of the courts in his first 100 days in power. See HITLER’S FIRST HUNDRED DAYS, Peter Fritzsche.
People are overlooking the Chief Justice's role in this. Should he take action against the Administration for not enforcing one of its opinions/decisions, that could be a nuclear event within the Court system.
Notably, Chief Justice Roberts touched on this exact possibility in his year end report: “Within the past few years, however, elected officials from across the political spectrum have raised the specter of open disregard for federal court rulings. These dangerous suggestions, however sporadic, must be soundly rejected.” https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2024year-endreport.pdf
Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. It is appreciated.
What an 'interesting' time we live in. I for one appreciate having your clarifying comments otherwise I might have assumed the administration was already simply ignoring the court orders.
The day-to-day is of course very important. But, I am looking for a book or in-depth article that tries to explain what has happened over the past 8 years since the end of Obama and the start of Trump II? When people look back over the history, were there events (covid in 2020 as opposed to 2019 or 2021), or decisions (Obama pushing Hillary over Biden, or Trump listening to Fauci and sending everyone home) or other events that led to where we are now? Or, are we seeing the results of the right's planning and execution over the years through efforts like the Koch Brothers, the religious right, and otherwise? Or, are we seeing the four years between Trump I and II as a period for unusual planning and efforts by the far right through Project 2025 and otherwise that would not have gotten off the ground if Trump had beaten Biden? The flip side of the question is are the Democrats doing any of the things the right did? Anyhow, looking for some perspective.
That groundwork came a long time ago from Big Tech disruptors.
Of course we enjoy reading the news four days ahead of time! Thanks for your analyses, so helpful to have some clear-headed thinking about this tumultuous time.
Excellent piece today, Gabe, as always. I wish more writers on Substack possessed the nuance that you do. Please keep up the great work!
Relevant to all of this discussion is the fact that some years ago an evolution began where the legislative branch of the United States government began to weaken and stop making laws. Instead, too much of the time has been spent in meaningless proclamations that get some debate. It is sad to watch televised statements by members of the House of Representatives and the Senate standing in front of an empty chamber.
Meanwhile, the executive branch, substituting for the legislature, makes often kleptocratic proclamations. These actions seem to please some percentage of the citizen while disappointing and enraging the remaining percentage.
I'm curious. Does the administration "comply" with the courts of they take advantage of the slow pace of justice and simply complete their mission before the final outcome? Because we've seen that already. Does it make it less of a crisis that they usurped the will of the people and constitutional protections "by the rules?"
Thanks for this very clear and entertaining read. The game of talking to two audiences plays out here in the UK too, particularly with immigration. We don't have a written Constitution but we have statutes, treaties, and court precedents arising. Our last Conservative Government was increasingly frustrated at the "pesky kids", our judiciary, ruling against their populist plans to eg deport asylum seekers en masse to Rwanda (an "unsafe" state, in terms of human rights - according to the courts). The right-wing media, which is most of our mainstream press, were calling judges "the enemies of the people". Much noise from politicians about the courts frustrating the will of the majority government. So a quick symbolic majority vote to change the law to say "actually Rwanda is safe, so there". But guess what, the Courts were still going to be the arbiter of whether that new law changed reality, as judged against existing legal standards. Then the Conservatives ran out of time, and lost the general election.
The moral of this UK story is the Populist right over-promised to their supporters, couldn't deliver Rwanda because they did, in fact, have to obey the judicial ruling, and their voters stopped trusting them. Trump seems to be able to deliver much more, for now, and he's more adept at presenting his failures as victories.