Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
A Republic, if you can keep it
A Republic, if you can keep it
Sep 21, 2024 12:31 AM

On Friday, President Donald J. Trump invoked the powers mander-in-chief and declared a state of emergency. This legal step will allow him to allocate billions of dollars for the construction of a wall on the southern border, bypassing the obstruction of Democrats — and many Republicans — in Congress. Immediately, a discussion on the legality of the decision took over the public debate. Many self-identified conservatives soon pointed to the alleged breach of constitutional order related to this decision and the start of a dangerous In response, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi issued a threat that “if” and “when” a Democrat is elected back to the White House a state of emergency might be exercised for one of her party’s goals – gun control.

In the National Review, David French spoke for many anti-Trump critics when he wrote:

I do not dispute that Trump likely can declare a national emergency, in large part because Congress has placed few meaningful restraints on that power, but such declarations don’t allow him to do anything he wants; they mainly serve to unlock other statutes which grant him other powers.

And he proceeded:

We’ve grown sadly accustomed to presidents’ abusing poorly drafted statutes to stretch their power well beyond the Founders’ intent.

Setting aside French’s anti-Trump bias, he is making a profession of faith toward one of the most cherished legal philosophies among conservatives: constitutional originalism. This legal hermeneutics, championed by two late titans of U.S. constitutional law Antonin Scalia and Robert H. Bork, proposes that judicial interpretation must be given through the evaluation of the historical dimension of a legal norm. This means that the judge in applying the law to the concrete case must hold the perspective of the legislators who created this particular law. In other words, the law should be enforced according to its original intent and not the present will of the judge.

Underneath this originalist philosophy, there’s a consideration about the nature of a republic. In contrast to an empire or a kingdom that has its axis of political existence in the monarchy, the republic has a delicate structure of distribution and organization of power. Italian political theorist Norberto Bobbio wrote that the republican system as conceived in Europe had two fundamental characteristics: 1) the republic should be relatively small like a city-state, and 2) it should have a homogeneous population. These two fundamental characteristics had their raison d’être in the necessity of mutual loyalty among the citizens of the republic. On the one hand, a republic tends to instability unless it avoids territorial conquests and large population influxes. On the other hand, it will always have to struggle to not be absorbed by its more powerful neighbors.

Since power always tends toward concentration,the blend of internal and external tensions tends to push the republican experience to failure. Internally, elites will battle for political hegemony and once this hegemony has been conquered by one group, a new round of struggles will follow within this winner elite, until a single man is able to assert his supremacy over the others and e absolute ruler. On the external front, the republican regime will have two options; it can conquer new territories and people, increasing its military power, or succumb to a foreign power. Be that as it may, the political ties that existentially unite the people in a republic will be lost.

According to Bobbio, one of the ways that a republic tries to survive is to maintain its purity through fidelity to the primordial constitution. Just as in Lycurgus’ Sparta, the text that founds the political regime must never be altered. Any change would inevitably lead to the degeneration of the political order towards chaos or tyranny. It’s this idea about the wisdom of the Founding Fathers that characterizes the intellectual horizon of American constitutional originalism.

However, I do not believe this paradigm can be applied to the United States anymore. No matter what perspective one takes, the constitutional reality created by the Founders has perished. No one lives in the country created by George Washington, Thomas Jefferson or James Madison, but in now in a nation reconstructed in the image and likeness of the FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society. The United States that was founded purposefully with a weak central government has given way in the last century to an assertive and intrusive federal government, controlled by a despotic bureaucratic elite that every two years gives mon American man the illusion of democracy at the ballot box

During all this time, the gravedigger of constitutional rights has been the Supreme Court, whether it had a conservative majority or not. Justices validated Woodrow Wilson’s dictatorial measures and the FDR’s concentration camps. Appointed by Richard Nixon, Harry Blackmun was the author of the infamous Roe v. Wade opinion, reading into the Constitution a right to privacy that does not exist. A conservative majority validated the domestic spying on American citizens by the government in the name of the war on terror and greatly expanded the state’s power to enforce eminent domain. Chief Justice John Roberts is an example of how the Constitution became irrelevant. According to Joan Biskupic’s The Chief, Roberts’s decision on the constitutionality of Obamacare in NFIB v. Sebelius was entirely motivated by political considerations. Although he believed the bill to be unconstitutional, Biskupic showed how Chief Justice Roberts preferred to create an extravagant interpretation and read in the law what was not written than to give subsidies to the left-wing narrative that conservatives control the Supreme Court.

Listen to the brief clip below from Ilya Shapiro, Cato Institute Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies, who spoke at Acton in 2016 on judicial restraint, Chief Justice John Roberts and Obamacare, and the unchecked growth of the federal government.

The American constitutional system has been so mutilated by the unchecked growth of the federal government and its bureaucracy that trying to protect the rights established by the Magna Carta through conventional means is the same as trying to treat a knife wound with a Band-Aid.

One of the main fears of conservatives toward Trump’s decision to declare a state of emergency is that it will generate a dangerous precedent. What are they talking about? I have no idea. Liberals have been expanding and plotting to expand the government’s power through executive action to implement their policies since the New Deal. Before Trump made made his decision, Barack Obama promoted immigration reform unilaterally and in spite of Congress: the so-called DACA, which authorizes the government not to follow the law. Today, the United States is engaged in military conflicts directly or indirectly across half of the Middle East. When was the last time Congress passed a war declaration? It was during World War II. There are American troops now struggling in Syria, a sovereign nation, with no legislative act to support it.

Trump’s decision can only be understood in the greater context of the institutional crisis of a republic that finds itself wholly divorced from the constitutional order that created it. American society today is rooted in the desires of the elite that control both political parties and are determined, through illegal immigration, to gain power at the polls and implement a broad program of social engineering.

The ancient Romans understood that in times of crisis powers of exception should be given to the leaders to save the Republic. This is the theoretical nature of Trump’s declaration of emergency: to save the Republic.

A natural cycle has governed human societies since time immemorial: All regimes tend first toward decay and then to renewal. The American constitutional order was created by a Revolution; perhaps it is time for a new American revolution.

Homepage photo credit:President of the United States Donald Trump speaking at the 2018 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland. Gage Skidmore. WikiCommons.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Understanding the quantity theory of money
Note: This is post #106 in a weekly video series on basic economics. The quantity theory of money states that there is a direct relationship between the quantity of money in an economy and the level of prices of goods and services sold. According to the theory, if the amount of money in an economy doubles, price levels also double, causinginflation. The consumer, therefore, pays twice as much for the same amount of the good or service. In this video...
Samuel Gregg: Bringing natural law to the nations
“If sovereign states ordered their domestic affairs in accordance with principles of natural law,” says Acton research director Samuel Gregg at Law & Liberty, “the international sphere would benefit greatly.” During periods of resurgent national feeling, mon for enthusiasts of liberal international order and human rights activists to begin emphasizing the importance of international law and the way they think it should guide and restrain the choices of nations. Since the United Nations Assembly adopted theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights(UDHR)...
Govt may deny homeschool families custody to teach tolerance: ECHR
The government has the right to remove children who are homeschooled from their parents’ custody if authorities believe their parents will not teach children “tolerance,” the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled last week. The Wunderlich family had claimed German authorities violated their innate human rights by denying them custody and forcibly enrolling their children in public schools to further their “social integration.” But the ECHR disagreed. Nearly three dozen police and social workers stormed the family’s home in...
Toward ‘humanomics’: Deirdre McCloskey on honoring the world of human creation
In her transformative Bourgeois Era trilogy, economist Deirdre McCloskey challenged our popular theories about the causes of our newfound economic prosperity, arguing that it sprung not from new systems, tools, or materials, but rather the ideas, virtues, and rhetoric behind them. “The Great Enrichment, in short, came out of a novel, pro-bourgeois, and anti-statist rhetoric that enriched the world,” she writes. “It is, as Adam Smith said, ‘allowing every man [and woman, dear] to pursue his own interest his own...
The irony of Patagonia’s tax cut ‘protest’
In response to the recentRepublican-led tax reform—which reduced corporate taxes from 35% to panies have responded by handing out surprise bonuses, increased 401(k) matches, and various wage bumps. For pany like Patagonia, however, the tax cuts have been labeled “irresponsible,” a symbol of the federal government’s reckless apathy. In response, Patagonia CEO Rose Marcario recently announced that the outdoor pany will donate its $10 million tax-cut windfall to its preferred partners in battling climate change. “Instead of putting the money...
Is a no-deal Brexit a ‘moral failure’?
After a long postponement, the UK Parliament has resumed its debate leading up to the “meaningful vote” on Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit deal. As of this writing, the promise is predicted to fail by an historically large margin – and some clerics consider this not just unfortunate but immoral. Rev. Richard Turnbull analyses that argument, and the status of Brexit, in a new essay written the Acton Institute’s Religion & Liberty Transatlantic website. Rev. Turnbull writes: In the upper...
C.S. Lewis on how the humanitarian theory of punishment threatens liberty
Over the past decade conservatives have, once again, e champions of criminal justice reform. To some this appears to be a surprising development. Why would conservatives, the self-proclaimed champions of law and order, have concern for the treatment of criminals? On reflection, though, the interest and connection es more obvious. Conservatives are concerned with how law and order leads to human flourishing, and so are necessarily troubled by a criminal justice system that is neither just nor serves the interest...
The Brexit deal defeat and confidence vote: Why Christians should care
UK Prime Minister Theresa May suffered the largest defeat in modern history last night, as Parliament rejected her Brexit deal by a vote of 202-432; she now faces a confidence vote that could turn her out of office.Rev. Richard Turnbull – who is both ordained in the Church of England and the directorof the Centre for Enterprise, Markets, and Ethicsin Oxford – explains the likely es in a new essay forthe Acton Institute’sReligion & Liberty Transatlanticwebsite.Christians should be concerned about...
What Christians should know about marginal tax rates
Note: This is the latest entry in the Acton blog series, “What Christians Should Know About Economics.” For other entries inthe series seethis post. What it means: A marginal tax rate is the amount of tax paid on an additional dollar of e. The Explanation: What is the tax rate you pay on your current e? For most Americans, the question is surprisingly difficult to answer. The reason we don’t know our tax rate is because we have a progressive...
A call for harmony — and a demand for truth
Pope Francis’ recent Christmas message, ‘Urbi et Orbi’, was a meditation on the roots of fraternity in the incarnation: What does that Child, born for us of the Virgin Mary, have to tell us? What is the universal message of Christmas? It is that God is a good Father and we are all brothers and sisters. This truth is the basis of the Christian vision of humanity. Without the fraternity that Jesus Christ has bestowed on us, our efforts for...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2024 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved