Donald Trump has quickly transformed our democracy into a dictatorship, where the opposition and criticism are stifled and punished. Sadly, our Democratic leaders, our most influential citizens, our corporate chieftains, and the complicity of spineless Republicans are standing on the sidelines, hoping that someone more aggressive, courageous and persuasive will take the lead. Even the Supreme Court’s majority has done its share of Trump-coddling.
Perhaps the most pernicious example is the Senate Republicans’ confirmation of the most unqualified, obsequious and dangerous cabinet in our history due to fear of being challenged by a primary candidate backed by Trump and financed by Elon Musk.
To be clear, we no longer live a democracy where the fear of retribution precludes criticism of and opposition to our president and his enablers.
Trump has launched criminal investigations into:
- The prior head of Cybersecurity who publicly contradicted his false claims of election fraud,
- The former head a Department of Homeland Security who wrote an opinion criticizing the president,
- Letitia James, the attorney general of New York, who filed a lawsuit against him,
- The fund-raising practices of the Democrats’ main donor platform, inhibiting contributions for fear of tax audits and penalties.
- The fund-raising practices by PBS and NPR to justify funding cuts, and
- 60 universities, threatening them with severe penalties if they don’t eliminate DEI from their curriculum.
Trump also:
- Illegally suspended hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to, Brown, Columbia, Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania to pressure them into eliminating their DEI programs,
- asked the I.R.S. to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status and its eligibility to host foreign students if they don’t terminate DEI practices.
Trump used federal dollars and a stable of DOJ lawyers to bring defamation suits against eleven media companies as he seeks to eliminate legal obstacles to winning his cases.
Republican politicians faced threats of violence against those who voted for Trump’s impeachment and conviction for the Jan. 6 assaults and for opposing Pete Hegseth’s confirmation as Secretary of Defense.
Trump also has prohibited the government from hiring law firms perceived to be friendly to the Democrats, threatened to cancel their clients’ government contracts, and suspended their security clearances, precluding them from many government cases. Clients that challenge the Trump administration have a hard time finding legal representation. And reputable firms have avoided legal battles with the government to avoid Trump’s wrath.
If Republican lawmakers obeyed their conscience, they would have already impeached, convicted and removed Trump. But impeachment won’t happen until Republicans fear being replaced by a primary challenger who’s not obedient to Trump, or by a Democrat in a national election.
The Supreme Court could hasten his departure or at least stop his dictatorial practices by expediting the ability of lower courts to sanction Trump and his enablers, including by incarcerating them. Instead, the Court’s majority has prolonged the process.
A District Court had ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate and effectuate” the return of Abrego Garcia to the United States. On appeal, the Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration only “to facilitate” Garcia’s return and omitted the word “effectuate.” It also held that the meaning of “effectuate” in the District Courts opinion was unclear and “may exceed its authority,” and warned the District Court to give “due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.” The Supreme Court then delayed sanctioning Trump and other violators by remanding the case to the District Court to clarify what it meant by “effectuate.” Trump, of course, seized on the Supreme Court’s language, arguing that it required the District Court “to respect the president’s authority … to manage foreign policy,” thumbing his nose at the entire Judiciary.
Had the Supreme Court just affirmed the District Court’s decision without its gratuitous language, lower courts that issued the orders Trump defied would have been free to impose sanctions, including incarceration, of the violators.
The Supreme Court previously held that the power to compel compliance by holding a defendant in contempt is backstopped by the ability to jail people who defy court orders.
The Supreme Court has also unanimously held that courts possess the authority to appoint a private attorney outside the Executive branch to prosecute civil contempt if the Executive branch refuses to do so, and that “the ability to punish disobedience of judicial orders” is “essential to ensuring that the Judiciary has a means to enforce its own authority without complete dependence on other branches.” Moreover, thepresident cannot pardon a party held in civil contempt, and immunity only applies to criminal conduct, and not to civil contempt.
Finally, jailed members of the administration can end their incarceration by complying with courts’ orders, including by resignation.
It takes courage to stand up the Trump’s threats of retribution, but there can’t be a more compelling motivation than to restore our lost democracy. As Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski put it, “We are all afraid. It’s quite a statement. But we are in a time and a place where I certainly have not been before.”
