Did Trump just admit that he is a dictator?
President Trump is not seeking to have the Power of a King. He is seeking to have more power than the Kings of England.
Well, that didn’t take long.
At noon on Monday, January 20th, Donald took the Presidential Oath of Office—the same oath taken by every president since George Washington. In the Oath Trump pledged to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Within eight hours, Trump had not merely violated the Oath, he had emphatically repudiated it. He justified his actions by stating “I have Article Two [of the Constitution] powers, which states I can do anything I want.” If that sounds to you like a four-year-old refusing to go to bed, you are not alone.
By my calculation Trump –just on that day- violated or repudiated the Constitution four times. In two of those, he explicitly defied laws passed by Congress.
The five violations/repudiation are:
- Declaring the 14th Amendment birthright citizenship clause did not mean what it specifically says. The amendment states :
- All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
- At the time of its passage, “all persons” was intended by Congress to include any person born to immigrants, regardless of their immigration status. Since its passage, the section has always been interpreted to apply to “all Children born in the United States, including children of immigration. This interpretation is not only the plain language of the amendment ; the author of the Amendment, Congressman —-specifically stated at the time that the phrase “all persons” was intended to apply to children of Foreign-born immigrants. At the time, Congress was well aware of the problems of too many immigrants; it had been a political issue since the 1840s. It is also the meaning upheld by the Supreme Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898. Ironically, the Court which issued that opinion is the same Court that decided Plessy v. Ferguson.
- Contrary to the plain language, Trump apparently interprets “all people” as only applying to all [white] Citizens, asserting without basis that it excludes any child born to an immigrant. Trump’s claim, as described by the federal Judge who struck it down, is ludicrous. The judge noted that he could understand how :”any lawyer could believe, let alone defend, Trump’s claim. Unfortunately, these arguments have been common for years. If Trump believes something ought to be true, then it is true. Anyone who disputes his delusions is the enemy.
- Stating that he was suspending the law passed by Congress which banned Tik-Tok until he could ‘make a deal’ to resolve the issue. Obviously, the President has no power to suspend a law passed by Congress. That act alone is an impeachable offense.
- Issuing an Order requiring state law enforcement officials to enforce orders issued by the Trump administration, even if those orders violated state law and/or the orders of the Governor. This is a shocking defiance of the separation of Powers between the states and the federal government, which is fundamental to the Constitution. Local law enforcement is preserved by the Constitution to the States. There is literally nothing in the Constitution which could even plausibly justify Trump’s actions, yet he has threatened the states to comply. .He later expanded upon this action by proposing to prohibit New York from putting taxes on cars in Manhattan. Most of Trump’s violations of laws are extremely serious; This proposal resembles a skit on Saturday Night Live or Monty Python.
- Ordering federal employees to violate laws passed by Congress by refusing to spend money authorized by Congress for specific purposes. He expanded the orders later in the week, affecting 3 trillion dollars of Federal Spending. In addition to being unconstitutional, this action violates a law passed by Congress in 1974, designed specifically to avoid this scenario. The Order was recently rescinded, largely because it was so poorly written that it could not be enforced. The Order will be rewritten and issued again.
- Trump also fired various groups of federal civil service employees, a clear violation of both the Pendleton Act of 1883 [which established the non-partisan civil service] and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. His action was largely retaliatory, firing all of the Justice Department employees who took part during the investigation of his many crimes. This was as surreal as it was expected. The concept of a felon, guilty of many crimes [yes, he was guilty] firing the prosecutors would appall the authors of the Constitution. It should shock all Americans.
The birthright citizenship order, partially repudiating a portion of the 14th amendment, was the order which the media focused on; the media loves issues which can be easily explained. However, this order has already been blocked by a federal judge [appointed by Reagan] who declared it as “blatantly unconstitutional” and the most extreme violation of the Constitution he has ever seen.
However, while less well known, the order blocking the spending of federal funds authorized by Congress Is the most dangerous. Trump is stating to Congress that he, not Congress, will determine which laws will be enforced and which will be funded. Except for Watergate, this is most serious violation of law or Constitution in American history. The Order was immediately blocked by Federal Courts and then rescinded, but it will be rewritten and reissued.
The ’Power of the Purse—the authority of Congress to authorize and direct the expenditure of federal funds, is the very first provision of the Constitution; it was intentionally made the first provision in the Constitution because it was considered by the framers to be the single most important requirement of the Constitution. It was extensively explained and discussed, including in the Federalist Papers, and was one of the major arguments used for ratification. At the time the public were concerned with making the Presidency too powerful. In response Alexander Hamilton explained that the Constitution specifically separated the Power of the sword from the Power of the purse. By doing so, the Constitution ; by doing so, it ensured that the President’s Powers were limited, and that a President could never become a king.
In any democracy, a free press which had not been intimidated by threats would have denounced it from the rooftops. To my knowledge, only the New York Times and the British paper the Guardian have explained why it is unconstitutional. Most news organizations have accepted the Administration’s cover story. Apparently, most media outlets do not understand that violating the most important provision of the Constitution is not “just politics.”.
Trump’s justification for these actions demonstrates that either Trump does not understand what democracy is, or that, as President, he does not intend to uphold it. His explanation is that he took this action to ensure that federal spending was “aligned with Presidential priorities, which expressed ‘the will of the people.”
There are two obvious flaws in this justification. First, federal spending is not intended to be aligned with presidential priorities. It was intended to reflect the priorities of Congress. If Congress passes a law which the current or future president opposes, then the President is obligated by the Constitution to carry out that law, including any budgetary implications. It should not need to be repeated, but the president must obey the law. This is true even if he contends, as here, that the applicable statute is unconstitutional; that issue can only be decided by the Supreme Court. Of course, the contention that this restriction of presidential power is absurd on its face; the portion of the law he rejects merely repeats the requirements of Article 1 of the Constitution. . Trump is essentially declaring that the first clause of the Constitution is unconstitutional.
Second, the framers made clear that, as explained in the Federalist Papers, the House of Representatives, not the President, reflects the Will of the People.
Third, and perhaps the most terrifying aspect of this argument is Trump’s use of the phrase ”the Will of the People” as being the basis of his power. The concept of the “Will of the People” as the basis for the Power of the leader has been claimed by every Dictator and would be autocrat since the beginning of the 19th Century, including Stalin. Mussolini, and Hitler. Hitler in particular was fond of the phrase, Froom an historical viewpoint, the statement appears suggestion intends to be a Dictator.
It is impossible to explain how dangerous Trump’s actions are. The Power of the Purse –was described by Alexander as the most fundamental part of every functioning democracy. He emphasized that separating the “Power of the Sword” from the “Power of the Purse” is the essential requirement for ensuring liberty; Madison and Hamilton, the primary authors of the Constitution, believed the Power of the Purse was the most fundamental requirement for a functioning democracy. It was established in England in 1215, in the Magna Carta, and has continued in England until today. It is a practice in every European democracy, and a similar practice also existed in Greek Democracy. I am not aware of any democracy which did restrict the “power of the Purse” to the Legislature. .
Without the exclusive “Power of the Purse” enshrined in the Constitution, Congress loses its authority and becomes an afterthought. If the Power of the Purse is retained, by the President, the President obtains most of the authority of an authoritarian ruler. He alone controls where and how the government spends money, and which functions it supports, and which functions are abolished. He can abolish, by withholding funds, any government function he dislikes, and he can choose which laws will be enforced, and which will continue. He can even effectively abolish any federal Agency he dislikes, such as The Departments of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency. It also creates massive opportunities for corruption and intimidation. If the President controls who gets federal money and who doesn’t, there is a tremendous incentive for corporations and wealthy individuals to finds ways to line “the President’s pockets” with gifts of cash or investments in his company. [Trump’s messaging service, Truth Social, has never earned a profit, but received a huge amount of investments after the election.
Related Concerns.
There are several other dangers amplifying Trump’s claim of Dictatorship.
First, some of his subordinates promised, or at least suggested, they will violate the law if asked. The most concerning of these is Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Hegseth was asked by a reporter whether, if Trump ordered the Military to fire on American citizens, such as protestors. Excluding the Civil Wars Excluding the Civil War, Excluding the Civil War, almost every official in American history would have answered “No—are you out of your mind.” Hegseth did not do so. He strenuously tried to evade the question, providing several nonsensical answers. However, he admitted that he would comply with Orders issued by Trump, essentially admitting that would likely accede to Trump’ wishes.
The use of US troops for domestic law enforcement is prohibited by law. It is unclear how the Military would respond in such a situation, for example. However, as a former Army attorney, I am comforted by the knowledge that every Army/Navy officer I’ve ever met would not comply with such an Order. Perhaps that is why Trump is attempting a loyalty purge of the Military High Command. .
For pure chutzpah, however, no one could outdo Kash Patel, the nominee for FBI Director. In a book published three years ago, Patel compiled an extensive “enemies list,” of sixty persons whom the government should “go after” for opposing Trump or even criticizing Trump. The list includes members of Congress and journalists. During his Senate Confirmation hearing, Patel backpedaled furiously from such statements. Until that hearing, however, Patel did not retreat from threats of retribution; he even suggested that he would go after television networks which criticized Trump. His true intentions are evident.
Historically, this is a common tactic of autocracies or would be dictators such as Victor Orben of Hungary. If the government controls or intimidates the media into submission, it can end democracy, even if it allows sham elections. I hope American media outlets are taking notice. Unfortunately, the threats are already having an effect. For example, two newspaper owners refused to allow their papers to exercise editorial authority by endorsing Kamala Harris for President. In a similar vein, ABC settled a fraudulent libel lawsuit, even forcing George Stephanopoulos to apologize for telling the truth. Such “bending of the knee” only emboldens a dictator. . . . .
Finally, Government employees who carry out Trump’s unlawful Orders -even Career Civil Servants, should be aware that they —are breaking the law and may be held to account in the future. Hopefully, most Civil Servants are aware that, under the Nuremberg Principles, “just following orders” is not a defense.
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?
For anyone paying attention, none of the above actions — or Trump’s future violations-of-law — should come as a surprise. Trump is a convicted felon and has also been convicted of what is essentially rape. [New York law requires that “to classify of rape” the rapist must essentially be successful in his sexual performance, so an impotent rapist is off the hook]. More importantly, Trump was clearly guilty of most of the federal indictments he received in the Washington DC and Florida cases. Washington. In particular, the evidence in the Florida case is so overwhelming [and includes video] that it would be almost impossible for a non-Partisan jury to acquit him. That is precisely why Judge Cannon refused to allow the case to go to trial: she knew he would be convicted. Similarly, the Supreme Court repudiated the Constitution by inventing a shockingly false claim of Presidential immunity primarily to enable him to win the election. [That will be the subject of a future post]. To be fair, I am greatly relieved that the election is the likely basis for the immunity decision; it would be terrifying if the Justices actually believed that the President is an elected king.
Unfortunately, I believe this Judicial success will only embolden him to go further. Based on the first 10 days, it is clear that he will continue to violate the law and constitution. For example, he has issued an Executive Order—also unlawful- to allow for career civil servants to be replaced by political appointees.
Donald Trump, like all bullies-believes only in power. He will not stop until Congress, the Courts, or the public confront him. It is up to us to save democracy.
As an attorney I took a sacred oath to protect and defend the Constitution and American Democracy. Trump’s rejection of the Constitution and the law, and his determination to ignore both, pose an existential threat not only to American Democracy but to freedom and democracy around the World. As individuals, we may have little power, but collectively we are strong; I believe we have a moral duty to act. May God have mercy upon us if we fail. .
Leave a comment