The Right Thing.

Progress moves too slowly for those in a hurry.  Sometimes efforts to save our democracy seem slow apace. The simple truth remains: we are an experiment in men’s ability to govern themselves. Experiments take time. You try something, see if it works, determine whether you like it, put it out for comment, and see what happens. The Founders conceived a form of government never tried, only a concept. It is still in the trial stage.

Madison told us (The Federalist #51) that dividing government into equal branches would prevent despotism by one branch over another. It was an ingenious approach for the time. He saw the House as “the people,” the Senate as the “states.” He saw the Executive implementing the laws of the Legislature, and the Judicial as the limiter of each.

A government so conceived requires tenacity to maintain equilibrium. It is easy for one branch to put its thumb on the scale.  A Madisonian republic, however, was one in which “the legislative authority necessarily predominates” and the two houses “as little connected with each other as the nature of their common functions and their common dependence on the society will admit.”

Well, the last couple of decades show us what a lack of diligence can bring to a delicate attempt to be a free state. The Senate no longer calms the excesses of the House; Congress as a whole gives much of its authority to the Executive, the Judiciary seems comfortable with a strong executive at the helm, and a government less by the people than by the oligarchs and autocrats. Perhaps an extended generalization, but…

Churchill’s note that “Americans will always do the right thing, only after they have tried everything else” may be coming to pass. While still a majority conservative Court, it is a protector of the Constitution. Its job is to preserve the plain speak of the Founders. Article One, section eight of our Constitution states that “the Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises …”  Article Two gives no such power to the Executive.

The Supreme Court drew a red line last week. The Constitution prevailed. Justice Gorsich stated that while “the legislative process helps ensure each of us has a stake in the laws that govern us and in the Nation’s future… for some today, the weight of those virtues is apparent. For others, it may not seem so obvious… But if history is any guide, the tables will turn and the day will come when those disappointed by today’s result will appreciate the legislative process for the bulwark of liberty it is.”

Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, consolidated with V.O.S. Selections v. Trump, was a simple case; did the International Emergency Economic Powers Act authorize the President to impose tariffs? The Court said no. The Executive complained with vitriol. I'm reminded of Socrates's notion that, "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser."

The ruling was really less about tariffs in made-up emergencies than it was about the limits of power enumerated in the Constitution. It was also a clarion call for the Legislature to start behaving like a law-making body is supposed to act.

A number of the Supremes are in the strong-executive camp, even those who purport to be originalists. In more than twenty recent cases, it gave the Executive traditional deference, even wide latitude on issues, and has generally continued to give the Department of Justice prosecutorial discretion. In Learning Resources, though, it drew a red line. The Executive must follow the Constitution. Churchill was right.

The current inhabitants of the Executive departments show their preference almost daily, bolstered by Project 2025’s misunderstanding of the Founder’s aim – a nation with the people as the source of power.

They immediately announced continued tariffs under different legislation. The Executive’s reaction to the Court’s decision demonstrated a lack of respect for checks and balances, rancor, and name-calling. It was as though the act of appointing someone to the Court required rulings in the Executive's favor on any issue as a matter of course. It had the stench of mob rule.

The shot across the bow of the Executive branch could be a precursor of future rulings when the Constitution is trampled. It could, and would in a normal administration, return ICE to following constitutional processes in its efforts to deport those who entered the country by illegal means. It might push these agencies to provide something as simple as due process before deporting. It might dissuade the agencies from creating concentration camps across the country, expected to hold tens of thousands of people for extended periods of time. It might urge them to remove masks from their officers or add identification to their uniforms.

If none of these things happen, at least the people of the nation know that there is a point beyond which the Court will not tolerate violation of the Constitution. For those who have taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, it could be a good start toward making democracy great again.

 

 

 

I'm Confused?

 Like most of the rest of the world, I’ve been watching the uprisings on the streets of Iran. The middle-class is up in arms and being met with government arms. Thousands of citizens were killed in the streets. Hundreds threatened with hangings.

The Rial is hardly worth a Dinar anymore. Purchasing power struggles against a forty-two percent inflation rate. Who can afford food or rent? The government cracks down on the citizenry with abandon, irrespective of the validity of complaints. Up to a point, anyway.

President Trump threatened the government of Iran with an unspecified show of force if it hanged anyone, and they didn’t. Score one for Donald?

And again, like most of the rest of the world, I’ve been watching squads of masked military-dressed ICE officers in Minneapolis, beating American citizens, killing citizens, shooting them for no reason, breaking into homes without warrants, pulling foreign looking individuals out of their cars, threatening folks with deportation without due process, and just generally acting differently than you would expect from an American police force. They aren’t quelling the mobs; they are the mob.

President Trump’s Department of Justice is threatening to hold criminal investigations against the governor of Minnesota and the city’s mayor because they are pleading with the government to reduce the rhetoric, the meanness, and the rule by armed force-level federal police.

This is why I am confused. Our Dear Leader is supporting those who protest against their government in Iran, but at the same time, he and his administration are opposing those who protest against the un-American and cruel activities of our government. Measure for Measure seems to elude the federal brain.

Let’s be clear about what needs to be done and not done. The idea of getting rid of ICE is lunacy. We, the country, need a group responsible for enforcing immigration laws. Until recently, ICE has acted responsibly. What does make sense, however, is to stand down those wholly untrained thousands of people who are scaring the populace and put them through a revised proper training program. Somehow, as I watch them operate in the streets of our cities, I get the impression that they are being trained by veteran military personnel, rather than by highly trained police forces. I assume it is not a coincidence that they are dressed as military warriors and armed like soldiers of war. It scares the hell out of the people in the streets.

To oversimplify the thought, military tactics are designed to kill the enemy, while police are asked to protect and serve. That is a difference too large to be ignored. ICE agents need to be screened in the same manner as local police candidates and trained in the same way.

Senator Stephen Douglas favored slavery. Abraham Lincoln opposed it. In their famous Peoria debate on October 6, 1854, Lincoln declared that he hated it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. And then he said: “I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world – enables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocrites – causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many good men amongst ourselves into an open way with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty – criticizing the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest.”

Lincoln, as usual, has words and meaning for the ages. Once more, it is time to summon our better angels. ICE alone is making a mockery of the American way. The world watches a once-strong democratic republic lapse into just another country ruled by the whims of a strongman, regardless of the rationality of the decisions made. The longer it stands, the more hypocritical we look, and the less democracy resembles the shining light on the hill.

The world sees a nation whose legislative branch only functions to ratify what its party’s leader wants and oppose whatever the other party wants. They see a Supreme Court that has bought into the strong president concept and approved nearly every case he brought to the bench. They see masked goon-acting militia in the streets, fully masked, harassing the citizens and disappearing people. How can it do anything but remind the world of Argentina’s “disappearing” people, or Soviet gulags, or China’s Cultural Revolution? We watch every day as a little of America is snipped away, and the next day a little more.

So what are we going to do? Sitting still isn’t an acceptable reaction to what is happening around us. So, taking action seems like the only solution.

We can write our senators and representatives. Too much work, you say. Download the 5 Calls app to your phone. Write a short note, and it sends it to all of your legislators. Attend the No Kings marches. No administration can overcome the protests of twelve million people.

Take videos of unlawful police action in your neighborhood and send them to local TV stations. Join Indivisible to keep up on what is happening in the country that shouldn’t be happening.

We should recognize that too many news outlets have a mission to influence their users rather than to report the news unvarnished. We know that Fox News is ultra-right-wing, and MS Now is ultra-left-wing, especially the talking heads. The same is true of podcasts. Try to find one that is unbiased. Listen to the news broadcast from Germany, England, or even Korea. They tend to cover world news better than U.S. news outlets. We can search for truth rather than what we want to hear. Democracy relies on a well-informed population. Let’s be that. 

Let’s not be confused about what is happening in our country. 

It's That Time of Year!

 Everyone is telling you to be of good cheer. I’m trying. Before I forget, Merry Christmas.

And then there is Bah Humbug all around us. In a national address to the nation the other evening, the President told us that we had never had it so good. He told us we had the best economy in our history, and he implied that he might be a greater president than, well, Abraham Lincoln. And yet.

Our leader is an expert at the big story. It’s a standard strategy for those in power and those seeking power: tell the big lie because they are more likely to believe it than the small stories you could tell. So it is not unreasonable to think that a whole lot of people believe what they hear coming out of the White House.

The White House. Now there is something to be upset about. The home and office of the president are supposed to be simple, not grand like the palaces of Europe. We are a democracy, not a kingdom. Remember?

The Oval Office, that sacred ground of American power and grand simplicity, has been destroyed to the level of heresy. The desecration has reduced it to just another room. The mystic is gone. The symbol of world power looks like a decorator with no taste was let loose. It is gaudy, it is cliché, it is ugly. It proves money doesn’t buy class. It is embarrassing. 

The East Wing brings new fury, ripped from its connection to the White House. For what? For a ballroom bigger than the rest of the building, out of proportion to the rest of the site. It will take months to tear it down, if it ever gets built, after The Don leaves office. Could the place use a ballroom? Sure, but in proportion and without the glitz.

But back to the economy and stuff. If things are as good as we are told, why is the country in such a funk? We know that we have a pretty strong economy, but not the greatest. The polls are pretty much in agreement. The President’s numbers are in the toilet. Poll after poll indicates that the folks don’t think he is doing a good job managing the economy, the European war, the state of manufacturing, and most other issues. He does get reasonable marks for his efforts to reduce illegal immigration and close the border, but people don’t like how he is doing it.

We are not a country that sends masked men to pull people off the street and whisk them away in unmarked cars. We don’t put people on planes and send them to countries that will jail them for no reason. But we are becoming that kind of country.

Christmas letters are supposed to be uplifting, but too much is changing for the worse to be bright and shiny. We are paying too much for food, for gas, for entertainment, for basics like water and home energy. Too many will start the year with health insurance they can’t afford or no insurance at all. That is when the ER becomes the primary care provider, and our rates increase to pay for it.

There are three more years of this craziness before a term limit kicks in. My positive side says we will survive this. We survived the Civil War. We survived Teapot Dome. We survived other threats to democracy. We beat fascism in Europe, and we beat the Empire of Japan’s threat in Asia. We survived McCarthyism.

We can replace the new signs on the Kennedy Center and other buildings in DC. We can, with time, remove the Amazon-grade glitz from the Oval Office and the rest of the White House.

Based on what has happened this year, I shudder to think of what could happen in the next three. But there is hope for a better tomorrow. There has to be.

We still have great universities that are the envy of the world. We have local people trying every day to make their communities better and safer. We have millions of people in the streets across the country protesting the destruction of our institutions. When the people rise up, the people win. People can only wield power when we let them. So there is hope.

Let’s make our hope a positive force to help our democracy survive. Knowing we can do it gives me a much-needed brighter outlook as we end one year and begin another.

 

Happy New Year!!!

 

 

Hate!

 I hate America!

I didn’t know that until a few weeks ago. I didn’t come to it on my own, the Speaker of the House told me… I wasn’t singled out, mind you. It runs in the family, all four generations. Lots of my neighbors and nearly eight million others got the message at the same time. Speaker Mike Johnson told us that anyone who participated in a No Kings protest hated America. And you know me; I thought it was the other way around.

I don’t follow AOC on Instagram or Facebook; she is a bit progressive, you know, but she noted recently that calling someone who disagrees with your position on an issue un-American is the very definition of un-American.

On the other side, a young man slain for his beliefs, Charlie Kirk, garners thousands of chapters for his Turning Point organization that, in the name of saving democracy, spews views that are the antithesis of what America should represent.

A lot of what constitutes the new good is the opposite of what has defined America for generations. Affirmative Action is once again considered discrimination against white folks. A good education is no longer considered a worthwhile goal because we need more tradespeople. Why can’t we have both? Evangelical Nationalism, a growing segment of Christianity preaches the opposite of Christianity, calling us to turn to a theocracy instead of our tradition of advocating for the free exercise of any religion.

I’m registered as “No Party Preference.” I can speak out of both sides of my mouth. I’m usually just a bit left of center, but not enough to be called a leftie. I’m worried about our democracy. I’m told I shouldn’t worry about it; it’s what older folks do. Nobody cares, really. Worry about the important things, the pundits say, affordability, the new buzzword.

The recent government shutdown illustrates the dichotomy weaving its way through the country. While millions are worried about the price of health insurance, the lack of healthcare, and the price of food, other millions are worried about maintaining power and crumbling all the institutions that seem to be bothering them: universities, education in general, safety nets for the less fortunate, libraries, science research, gold-standard economic reporting, and even classic architecture. Have you noticed what they have done to desecrate the Oval Office and the White House in general?

The younger members of the Democratic Party are calling for new leadership. Those in their seventies and eighties have lost control of the narrative and ability to lead. They had the wind at their backs during the shutdown and blew it. They fought for affordability and gave in to easier flying schedules. They are a party with no discipline and no cohesive or catchy message aimed at the younger generations, arm wrestling against a supercharged and highly organized party of zealots.

The national movement to return to an affordable but democratic nation has begun. Prodded by young people and supported by folks of all ages, the nation is starting to awaken to the travesty thrust upon them in the last several months.

The first nationwide No Kings rallies a couple of years ago attracted only a few million people. The rallies last June attracted about five million people. The protests in October attracted more than seven million people.

Erica Chenoweth, a distinguished professor at Harvard, has studied the history of anti-authoritarian movements around the globe. She found that movements that achieved their goal usually represented three and a half percent of the population of the country. That is a lot of people. If the trend continues, twelve million Americans protesting against the current regime isn’t hard to imagine.

If you are a pessimist, the chances of success for No Kings are slim to none. An optimist thinks it’s possible with a little effort. It will take a lot of effort, but worth a try. But it will fail if it doesn’t bring forth a highly respected national leader.

Today, it has an organizer, Indivisibles’ Ezra Levin, but no leader. The civil rights movement had MLK. The current effort to restore our democracy needs a national leader who can rally the populists to do what is needed and what is right.

How do we know when we are in trouble?

When a nation sends its army against its own citizens, democracy is lost. When a nation sends masked secret police against its people, democracy fades. When national leaders turn the Department of Justice into a personal law firm to prosecute political enemies, democracy is done. When a nation tries to tell its universities what to teach and how to teach it, democracy is history. America was once the model of a modern democracy. Why did we let it lose its way?

We are told that it is always the economy that drives people’s feelings and their votes. Recent elections around the country tell a mixed story. The people of the State of New Jersey and the Commonwealth of Virginia elected Democratic governors. They both ran on an economic agenda, but the President’s agenda was on the ballot as well.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania returned three justices to its Supreme Court despite the opposition of the President. The Vice President’s brother lost an election in the very red State of Ohio.

The most interesting election to me was California’s Proposition 50, which reconfigures its congressional districts to offset the redistricting efforts in Texas. Not one person was on the ballot, and economics wasn’t on the ballot; it was all about the future of democracy. It garnered sixty-four percent approval from the voters. That is what a mandate looks like. Why did millions turn out to vote on one issue? Because the President had asked the State of Texas to Gerrymander their congressional district to make it easier to elect five more Republicans to Congress. When California retaliated by designing districts that would likely elect five more Democrats to Congress, the President instructed the Department of Justice to sue the state because it was an unfair tampering with the system; audacious is an understatement.

One must ask if a few elections in blue states equate to a national repudiation of the current administration’s efforts to undo our democratic processes. Maybe not. But all long marches begin with the first step.

It could also be a wake-up call for the administration. It might just let them know that their methods for achieving their economic and cultural objectives are just too severe, or just not the way we customarily do things. Masked men whisking people off the streets into unmarked cars is not the American way. It is the way of Russia and Hungary, or earlier, Chile, or Argentina. We have an annoying history of insisting on due process, even for hardened criminals.

It could be a reminder that government officials who take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution ought to follow its provisions.

But we know that this administration has no intention of protecting and defending the Constitution. They told us during the campaign that they would implement the Project 25 programs. It was a nine-hundred-page outline for changing the country from three equal branches of government to a country with a strong executive branch. It was a plan for increasing the power of oligarchs and moving us toward autocracy with a strong military dispersed among the citizenry. If it succeeds, the country is lost. If it succeeds even a little, we will not see our greatness again.

 

I don’t hate America, but I am concerned about the current state of affairs. Nobody runs for office with the promise to change nothing,  but change must be done within the norms of our longstanding institutions and culture. But people should not live in fear. Parents should not be afraid that when they send their kids to school, they may never see them again. People who follow the rules and go to the immigration office as scheduled should not be deported for following the law. Our police services, who pride themselves on serving and protecting themselves should not be forced to wear masks and walk the streets with weapons of war. Members of Congress should not be prevented from performing their oversight duties at detention centers. I don’t hate America; I just want it to be America again.

 

Not the American Way

  

I’ve never met Charlie Kirk. I don’t like the political views that he espouses, and I suspect he wouldn't like mine. But he did for his views what most of us are afraid to do for ours.

He thought them through, he organized, he went out on a limb to get his message out, he became the darling of the political right, he had the phone numbers of everyone important, and he used his influence to accomplish his aims.

His millions of followers followed him, listened to him, and supported him and his views. He was an Eagle Scout.

He took an oath years ago when he stood with his right hand held high and said: “On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my Country.”   He worked at it.  His motives were true. I disagreed with him.

Ezra Kline posted an opinion yesterday morning in the NYT that said that Kirk did his America correctly. Kline went on to say, "The foundation of a free society is the ability to participate in politics without fear of violence. To lose that is to risk losing everything. Charlie Kirk — and his family — just lost everything. As a country, we came a step closer to losing everything, too."

I agree.

So here we are again, bending a knee to the worst that is in us, shooting those with whom we disagree. Nobody should be shot for airing their beliefs. His MAGA world is roused to get even with their perceived enemies. The nut job that shot and killed him is one of many who disagree with Kirk’s hopes for the future of the nation. But he had no right to shoot him.

Naïve perhaps, but surely someone has a better argument for our future than Kirk’s. If they do, they should write about it, talk about it, organize around it, and preach about it. They should not shoot somebody because of it.

The irony, of course, is that the misguided shooting did the opposite of its intention. It didn’t stop people from speaking their beliefs, it didn’t lower the cultural temperature, and it didn’t bring calm. Just the opposite.

Now the MAGA world wants to increase the war against its adversaries. The rhetoric is and will continue to be more vitriolic. It is never good to trap the lion. It increases the tension that we have too much of.

Members of Congress, of both parties, are asking for more protection. They fear leaving their homes. Talking heads are watching their choice of words and their commute rituals. This is not the America Kirk wanted. It is not the world his verbal opponents want. It's not what I want. It is not what any right-thinking human would want.

Both sides need to come together to mourn the loss of a forceful American fighting for the America he wanted. The left and the right need to calm those who want to raise the political temperature. Liberals and Conservatives need to talk to each other, to try to bring America to a new norm, one of better discourse about issues and values, one that doesn’t revolve around hate for the opponent, one centered on the betterment of the nation.

This is supposed to be a nation for the huddled masses, for those yearning to be free. We are an experiment in the notion of self-government. But violence is shredding the fabric that is supposed to bind us together.

We should all lament the forced passing of a young man who had already made his mark. Many will say, “This is not who we are.”

But it is what we are becoming.

We can do better.

 

 

When Was the Tipping Point?

 It’s not easy being just a bit left of center. It’s harder knowing that we could be better, but the powers that be are trying to take us back to when we weren’t.

We were a small agrarian nation when a few bright men attempted to form a government free from despotic rule. You know, no taxation without representation, give me liberty or give me death, voting limited to landowner men who counted some people more important than others, and segregation in a wide swath of the lower states. We’ve seen those days, lived those days, when life was great for white Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPs) but not so much for others. I don’t want to go back there. I don’t understand those who do.

Our current dear leader is good at his play-acting. He knows how to create a cult of followers.

·         He values toddies over competence.

·         He values fear over progress.

·         He dislikes science and learning.

·         He dislikes the institutions that hold our democracy together.

·         He convinces people that he is their savior, all the while passing laws that claw back greatness.

·         He ignores the Constitution and insists that his followers ignore the founding documents.

Our current administration shouts about their support of the working class in one breath and takes away people’s basic needs:

·         food from families who need it.

·         medical care for tens of millions who can’t afford health insurance, and elders in nursing homes who would be on the street without the government's help.

The administration has a great advantage over those who don’t support it. There is no foil to its outrageous behavior. The Democratic Party has no leadership that can relate to the average citizen.

·         It is led by old fogies who won’t let younger people have a say in policy or message.

·         If a citizen says they are hungry, the party cites chapter and verse of some wonky policy designed to not offend the smallest cohort of supporters.

·         Sometimes I’m more upset with Democratic leadership than I am with the President. He couldn’t get away with what he does if they had the _ _ _ __  to stand up to him.

o   They are the ones who let Republicans take over state houses decades ago.

o   They are the ones who campaigned on culture issues that breezed over their constituents, who wanted to know how to reduce the cost of gas and groceries.

o   They are the ones who created so many regulations that middle-class families can’t afford to buy a house.

o   They lack a coherent message for regular folks.

Activist pro-democracy groups would have us all go into the streets regularly to protest the dismantling of our democracy. In June, they convinced five million people in eighteen hundred cities to join a No King uprising. Nothing changed. Last month, they called for another protest that drew far fewer opponents of the autocracy.

Malcolm Gladwell, in his book The Tipping Point, posits that it is small steps unnoticed that lead to a tipping point. I’m convinced that we didn’t notice when the nation hit the tipping point. It happened while we were thinking about something else.

When did we hit bottom?

·         Was it when we decided to let the administration export immigrants to foreign jails?

·         Was it when we said that due process didn’t apply to non-citizens?

·         Was it when we thought it was ok for an administration to tell a university which professors to hire and which to not hire?

·         Was it when we decided that we shouldn’t instruct students about anything in our history that might make them uncomfortable?

·         Was it when we accepted the idea that the Department of Justice and the FBI should no longer be nonpartisan institutions?

·         Was it when we didn’t protest masked goon squads snatching citizens off the streets because they didn’t look like WASPs?

When did we reach the tipping point? How long ago?

If we are still a democracy, it's hanging by a thread. We are certainly not the most democratic country in the world by a long shot. Some international surveys list us as the fifteenth most democratic country. The well-respected Economist Democracy Index doesn’t list the U.S. in its list of the top ten democratic countries. It ranks us as a flawed democracy, but not yet as an autocracy.

Some pundits tell us to forget all this talk about our Constitution and preserving our institutions and talk about kitchen-table issues. It will help win elections. I agree, but I wonder if lower food prices and lower gas prices will make up for the loss of our democracy. Surely not.

What then are we to do?

Only concerted action will bring a stop to the un-American activities of this administration. We need to encourage more people to take to the streets to demand restoration of healthcare for everyone, elimination of the tariff taxes that will increase prices on nearly everything at the store. We need to demand that the administration follow the Constitution – obey the courts, use due process before incarcerating immigrants and citizens, campaign for and elect young candidates for positions at the local level, the state and national levels, use the courts to end illegal censorship, to stop the government from telling the universities who to hire, what to teach, and how to teach it. Insist that we reinstate the government workers illegally fired by the DOGE movement. Repeal most of the Big Beautifuls Bill – it is not beautiful, it's ugly, and it is anti-American in its purpose and its effects.

It is time to restore our democracy before it is irretrievable.

 

 

Empty Shelves!

There is an old Japanese proverb that suggests, If you get on the wrong train, get off at the first stop. The longer you stay, the more costly the return trip becomes. At the current rate, it will be a long and expensive journey back to the America of the Founders’ dreams.

There is no denying that the current President has the adoration of many millions of his fellow citizens, policies bolstered by the sycophants who surround him. The loyal opposition has not found a message that can stop him. The best they can do, so far, is to fight him in the courts. At the lower court level, he is losing daily. On the appellate level, not so much.

I’m a stickler for the Constitution. I want those who take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend it, so help me God, ought to preserve it, protect it, and defend it. It is a simple document, which makes it the most powerful definition of democracy in the history of the world. Some say we live in a post-constitutional era, that it no longer makes sense for the modern era. What they want is a strong leader who will remake us into what we were when we weren’t so great. They want someone who can speak to their angst and get rid of those who are depriving them of their chance at greatness. They no longer revere the institutions that made us a great democratic nation. They are wrong.

The tariff chaos is a good example. The current administration has convinced too many people that other nations have been messing with the U.S for too long, taking advantage of us in the trading world. Their solution is to levy high tariffs on everything coming from abroad, raising and lowering them on a whim, as a negotiating tactic. But, to what end?

They tell us that it is punishing our trading partners. They have convinced millions that the selling country pays the tariff. That is a big lie. It is such a big lie that they are bargaining that people won’t believe it’s a lie. Goebbels taught that lesson.

The other night, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that a president doesn’t have the right to lay tariffs willy-nilly. It noted that the right to set tariffs was the province of the legislative branch. The ruling was stayed by an appellate court, awaiting further briefs. The administration’s press secretary stated that the lower court’s ruling was “judicial overreach.”  She continued with “There is a troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision-making process.” She avowed that the “courts should have no role here.” She is wrong.

The judiciary, an equal branch of government, has exactly that role. It is the safeguard that prevents overreach by the executive or legislative branches. Their actions are not, to my mind, troubling or dangerous. That is their role.

Article I of the Constitution states plainly that,  “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.”  Congress has the power, not the president. Full stop!

The longer we stay on this train hell-bent on destroying the very fabric of the nation, the longer it will take to return to sane governance, and it will be expensive. It will take time; the restoration of talent and science will take years; and regaining a nation's pride and reputation in the eyes of the rest of the world will take decades. It’s a long way back.

Think of a bookshelf loaded with books. Non-readers and interior designers may tell you that a wall of books is boring and gives a room a confining feel and look; take the books off the shelves and replace them with plants, bowls, pictures, and such. Once you remove the books and replace them with tchotchke, all you have is shelves. Some don’t get it.

The administration is emptying our national bookshelves and replacing them with political tchotchke. They denigrate the institutions that make America great, they remove institutional knowledge from the science labs, they fear free speech and condemn opposing views and demonstrations, and they starve the world’s poor. They think support for an invaded democracy is a transactional item. They devalue good relationships with historical allies. They are betting on institutional amnesia.

So, yes, it is good that the lower courts are trying to hold the executive branch to the Constitution. That is their job. They may be the last great hope for our democracy.