Extraconstitutional Limbo

I have an article up today with The Bulwark Online where I argue that we should be explicit about the fact that we are in a constitutional crisis, and that Trump’s legitimacy has been undermined to such a clear and obvious extent that other elected representatives have a clear and obvious duty to impeach and remove him in order to bring us back within the clear confines of the constitution. I try to make this argument in the least incendiary way possible, without focusing on specific questions about incitement or coordination. I emphasize what was plain for everyone to see on Wednesday: that Trump failed to do his job of protecting the constitutional order, in flagrant violation of his oath of office.

As an aside: I have a theory that it would be more sensible for Democrats to stick to the issue of Trump’s (shameless, seditious) dereliction of duty on Wednesday, rather than focus on the incitement of insurrection charge (which currently appears to be what Pelosi has in mind). If there’s any chance of Trump being removed quickly, without all kinds of grandstanding from the GOP, then I think focusing on Trump’s dereliction of duty may be a simpler and more intuitive case. To be clear, I do NOT believe that the chances of this happening are very high, but I do think it is important to articulate standards that we think are possible. And in my view, proceeding with a focus on dereliction of duty has the advantage of giving more Republicans the cover they would need to go through with it. As a matter of principle I don’t care one inch about giving these the GOP a fig leaf. But pragmatically what matters is getting Trump out quickly.

We’re in an Extraconstitutional Limbo

The president’s grasp of the reins of executive power has slipped. Other elected officials must bring us back within the confines of the constitutional order.

2 thoughts on “Extraconstitutional Limbo

  1. I think that Trump is no longer President. So I believe the only extraconstitutional limbo we have at this time is trying to remove a person from an office they no longer hold. This power is not called out in our Constitution. And perhaps dereliction of duty could be warranted in regards to executive orders to stop enforcing existing immigration laws by a man that just took an oath to support and defend the constitution and his responsibility under Clause 5: Caring for the faithful execution of the law.

Leave a Reply