4 ms·
The mechanism seems to rest on the principle of separation of powers - Congress is empowered both to write the laws, and to remove presidents. That means that t
by roenxi 2y ago
The mechanism seems to rest on the principle of separation of powers - Congress is empowered both to write the laws, and to remove presidents. That means that there can't be a major misalignment between Congress and the executive, because if Congress thinks the president is really out of line they can boot him.
It is quite a sophisticated set-up, really. You'd think in principle that the courts would decide when the presidency isn't following the law, but the actual power to punish the president lives in the legislature and it makes much more sense when examined in terms of what incentives exist.
- D13Fd 2y agoThe problem is that, through the pardon power combined with immunity from prosecution, the president can shield the entire executive branch from any obligation to execute on the laws that congress writes. It effectively neuters congress and prevents it from making any permanently effective law. Enforcement is instead left to the whims of the current congress and president at any time (who could be highly partisan Democrats, Republicans, or anyone else). That is clearly not how the constitution is intended to work.
- SV_BubbleTime 2y agoMaybe you should have been mad about preemptive pardons with the last guy? I swear I can not prepare myself anymore for the sheer hypocrisy that is about to happen in four years! You know it’s going to happen, but my issue is the theatre of it all.
- knowaveragejoe 2y agoThose were a smart move on his part - they knew trump was going to actually engage in the sort of lawfare they had been crowing about for the last 4 years.
- throwaway48476 2y agoThe constitutional remedy for abuse of pardon power is impeachment. In the model where any two branches can check the 3rd if two are of the same mind then there's nothing to do.
- D13Fd 2y ago> The constitutional remedy for abuse of pardon power is impeachment. It is not. The constitution allows impeachment for treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors only.
- sadeshmukh 2y agoWould that not be treason?
- true_religion 2y agoYou can be impeached for lying to Congress or maybe even substantially misleading it. Isn’t that how they got Clinton?
- locopati 2y agoRepeated unconstitutional actions seems to fit high crimes.
- closewith 2y agoAre you sure the legislative branch could physically remove this president from office? Given it's unlikely he'd accept any impeachment.
- kemotep 2y agoSouth Korea’s President tried to do that a few months ago and the military had to arrest them. If the President violates the law, and Congress impeaches and convicts them, and they don’t peacefully step down, and the military/police does not remove them from office/sides with the President, we effectively have a coup and the United States as outlined in the Constitution ceases to exist.
- closewith 2y ago> the United States as outlined in the Constitution ceases to exist. As the risk of deflating your apparently boundless optimism, that ship has sailed. The idea you have of a country operating under the rule of law is not congruent with reality.