The things is based on their legal interpretation of the constitution, the people chose the president to uphold law and order and do what’s best for the people. If the president determines this is what is necessary in order to protect the people from terrorists, his legal team will argue for a constitutional interpretation that says individual liberty is always secondary to the common good.
Just to be clear, this is not what I believe or support. This is what they will argue. I am writing this to try and warn people what they have in mind when they talk about constitutional interpretation
Right, and history shows that these are major mistakes that always have consequences.
I hope so. If the Senate and representatives won’t take a stand (which seems they won’t), it will be up to police, federal agents, and military leaders taking a stand and refusing orders, probably being terminated if not jailed/court martialed, and public support for them.
the supreme court gets to decide this. And considering some of the recent rulings about due process, I am hopeful.
But how are they going to enforce it? They’ve enforced 0 rulings so far. Trump has been publicly mocking them while defying their orders
I am hopeful if it does, but the memo is saying they can just do this. So it will take this actually being enforced and someone’s (or multiple people’s) rights being violated for this to end up before the supreme court.
I think it’s no coincidence there was such a high profile arrest of that judge in Wisconsin just before this happened.
