4 ms·

From https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/if-the-marshals-go-rogue-courts-have-other-ways-to-enforce-their-orders https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/if-

From https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/if-the-marshals-go-rogue-courts-have-other-ways-to-enforce-their-orders https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/if-the-marshals-go-r...: “As Berkeley Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky argues, ‘the hard truth for those looking to the courts to rein in the Trump administration is that the Constitution gives judges no power to compel compliance with their rulings — it is the executive branch that ultimately enforces judicial orders.’” This strikes me as a pretty serious omission in our Constitution. Did the Framers not consider the threat of a runaway executive? Or maybe the relative size of the government in those days made it seem like much less of a threat than it is today?

cmurf 2y ago
It's intentional. Federalist 78 contains the rationale. John Adams said the Constitution is intended for a moral (or virtuous) people. It's just a piece of paper. People have to support and defend it in order for the republic, an empire of laws, to persist. We may be out of virtue, and maybe we don't deserve Constitutional order. Enough people voted for an untrustworthy liar and a psychopath to be president. And the consequences will continue until he's removed from office. There is no bottom for him. And probably no bottom for this Congress. In any case, this presidency is going to be very expensive for everyone.
busyant 2y ago
> Did the Framers not consider the threat of a runaway executive? They kind of did consider this. Pretty sure that's what impeachment is for. I suspect the framers expected all three branches to be independent of one another. Right now, Executive branch is holding Legislative on a leash. Judicial branch has no levers.
- tastyface 2y ago
  But even with impeachment, the executive is still, technically, in charge of the armed forces, etc. Wouldn’t it make more sense for each co-equal branch to have some degree of executive autonomy? For example, marshals that report only to the judicial branch or Congress.
  - busyant 2y ago
    > Wouldn’t it make more sense for each co-equal branch to have some degree of executive autonomy? For example, marshals that report only to the judicial branch or Congress. Your suggestion sounds good at-a-glance. But I always worry that these types of ideas have down-sides that might not be immediately obvious. I have no idea what the down-sides might be for your particular suggestion, but it seems that all systems are corruptible if people try hard enough. I'm not trying to dismiss your suggestion--only saying that a lot of times, it's difficult to see the imperfections. I also think it's absurd that so many people treat the framers of the Constitution as deities. They were flawed people like the rest of us--and the Constitution is not a perfect document. If it were a perfect document, we would not be in the current situation, where the Executive branch is thumbing its nose as the Judicial branch.

cmurf 2y ago

It's intentional. Federalist 78 contains the rationale. John Adams said the Constitution is intended for a moral (or virtuous) people. It's just a piece of paper. People have to support and defend it in order for the republic, an empire of laws, to persist. We may be out of virtue, and maybe we don't deserve Constitutional order. Enough people voted for an untrustworthy liar and a psychopath to be president. And the consequences will continue until he's removed from office. There is no bottom for him. And probably no bottom for this Congress. In any case, this presidency is going to be very expensive for everyone.

busyant 2y ago

> Did the Framers not consider the threat of a runaway executive? They kind of did consider this. Pretty sure that's what impeachment is for. I suspect the framers expected all three branches to be independent of one another. Right now, Executive branch is holding Legislative on a leash. Judicial branch has no levers.

tastyface 2y ago
But even with impeachment, the executive is still, technically, in charge of the armed forces, etc. Wouldn’t it make more sense for each co-equal branch to have some degree of executive autonomy? For example, marshals that report only to the judicial branch or Congress.
- busyant 2y ago
  > Wouldn’t it make more sense for each co-equal branch to have some degree of executive autonomy? For example, marshals that report only to the judicial branch or Congress. Your suggestion sounds good at-a-glance. But I always worry that these types of ideas have down-sides that might not be immediately obvious. I have no idea what the down-sides might be for your particular suggestion, but it seems that all systems are corruptible if people try hard enough. I'm not trying to dismiss your suggestion--only saying that a lot of times, it's difficult to see the imperfections. I also think it's absurd that so many people treat the framers of the Constitution as deities. They were flawed people like the rest of us--and the Constitution is not a perfect document. If it were a perfect document, we would not be in the current situation, where the Executive branch is thumbing its nose as the Judicial branch.