• Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It broke the minute Trump exposed the fact that the Constitution says exactly nothing about what to do if anyone chooses to violate it, and the answer to the question of “What are you gonna do about it?” was essentially “Nothing.”

    • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      16 hours ago

      It’s really been a broken system since Marbury v. Madison (1803). The lesser known finding of that case was that SCOTUS can declare something to be illegal or a violation of the law but can’t do shit beyond that. It took over 200 years for a President to fully understand SCOTUS has no real teeth. If you control the enforcers of the law, you ARE the law.

      • Yondoza@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 hours ago

        I’d argue the checks and balances worked, the electorate failed. Trump tried to overturn and election and the checks and balances held. That should have been political suicide. He should have not even won a school board seat after that, but the electorate failed and reinstated him. You cannot build enough checks and balances into representative government to save the electorate from repeated mistakes. The checks are there to ensure someone must show their true intents to the electorate before they make a choice.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        It’s not that it took 200 years for a President to understand that, it’s just that all Presidents since then and until trump weren’t demented sociopath rapists who couldn’t be arsed to think of the good of anyone else.

        Using the law enforcement arm to specifically commit national crimes against citizens was more often than not considered what it was; treason.

        • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Every president in some way or form pushed those boundaries without any consequences. Even the lightly better ones, like the shade of grey only lightly different than black.

          Trump is the culmination of every president taking its way with the constitution without even a slap on the wrist.

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Vigorous enforcement is necessary, but there’s that whole “in group, out group, protect, bind” thing.

    • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Andrew Jackson already did that, but we acted like checks and balances still worked because Jackson defying the supreme court only resulted in the Trail of Tears.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Tbh it was always broken - it’s just that it’s never been done this blatantly, contemptuously, and systematically before.

      This is the firesale, and orangeboi et al are just vacuuming up every single cent they can wring from the wreckage that they’re turning our government and society into at breakneck pace.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Congress has abdicated their power for decades. The remedy is impeachment and scaling back administrative law for actual bills through Congress.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It’s not a check and balance when the Executive has gone rogue and the Justice Department operates under the Executive.

    There is no check. There is no balance.

    Remove the Justice Department from the Executive branch and place it under the Judicial branch.

    Similarly, there’s no check and balance on the Supreme Court either.

    Make it so that the House and Senate can over-ride a bad Supreme Court decision without having to pass an Amendment to do it.

    It’s rock-paper-scissors, guys. President can veto the House and Senate, the Judicial should hold the executive accountable, and the House and Senate should be able to over-ride the Supreme Court.

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      15 hours ago

      The problem is the majority of the legislative and the head of the executive decided to collude to just ignore the constitution and then proceeded to stuff the judicial branch with their puppets. The problem with the checks and balances is they don’t have an answer to “but what if 2/3rds of the government decides to wipe their ass with the constitution at the same time?”.

      No amount of reorganizing the deck chairs changes that calculus. The system was broken the moment they just decided not to remove Trump from office during his first impeachment. The only way I can see to do anything about that flaw is to just make it ridiculously easy to impeach any politician, say something like a general vote of the public that only requires a 25% margin to pass. Sure the Republicans absolutely would have used something like that against Obama, but at least we’d be able to clean all the corrupt bastards out of congress and the supreme court as well.

        • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          That does require a significant majority of the executive branch to go through with it.

          Impeachment is in ways similar to it.

        • sidelove@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Yup, and there’s some other conditions that would benefit from an immediate recall, too. It’s insane that the consequence for failing to pass a budget or raise the debt ceiling is that our financial system is damaged or collapses. Failure to get it done in a timely manner should result in an automatic extension or raise paired with snap elections on all members involved.

          Or hell, even just allow recall petitions at the federal level. Better to have a revolving door than a legislature that’s tempted to see what touching the third rail is like.