• JollyG@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 day ago

    “Checks and balances” in the context of US federal government just means that each branch has the ability to check the growth of power of the others. It’s not “a lie” because it’s still true. Right now congress could, if they wanted to, impeach the president or pass laws preventing him from doing the things he wants. The SCOTUS could stop him too if they wanted to actually take up cases on the law instead of using the shadow docket to avoid making rulings.

    Trump partisans hold a trifecta in government right now so they are not going to use their checks they have available to them. But one branch refusing to check another because its members were elected from the same stock of partisan lunatics is not the same as checks and balances not existing.

    • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      The executive is exceeding its power. Whether the other branches are just ok with it doesnt matter, they fail their obligation to the constitution. The executive does not have the power to rewrite the constitution. The executive does not have the power to write law. The executive does not have the power to deploy the military. The executive does not have the power to tariff. These are all things that are going unchecked.

      The legislature doesnt even have some of these powers without a super majority. They are only stalling the process to prevent the checks from occuring.

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

        The checks still exist to correct those abuses of power. Just because congress or SCOTUS is unwilling to use them doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

          • JollyG@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            23 hours ago

            That’s a nice bromide but framing the current constitutional crises as the result of a “lie” about checks and balances fundamentally mischaracterizes the issues at hand. For one it diminishes the compliance of the other branches which is clearly critical for enabling the abuse that we see. And it also overlooks the general issue that about half the national actively enables the naked corruption and ascendant facism of the current government.

            The problem of the present moment is not the structure of the government it’s the tolerance of the population.

            • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              23 hours ago

              The constitution never intended the general populace to govern. Look at things like the electoral college, the make up of the senate, gerrymandering, voting rights. Liberals believe in majority rule. I wouldn’t go as far as to say populism but we are seeing the results of populism from the GOP. The founders (not my fucking fathers) looked at governments like Athens and said, no way.

              The people do have power, but after they express that power they need to establish government. Our constitution is basically toilet paper to the people in charge because it doesnt grant them what they really want. Authoritarian rule. Today, checks and balances are not preventing them from imposing it.

              • JollyG@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                23 hours ago

                The point I was making was that the people who are in power are in power because about half of all voters are fine with them being in power and about a third actively want facist rule. Ultimately thisis not a failure of government structure. It’s a failure of citizens. Maybe that will change as those who supported trump from ignorance experience the consequences of their decisions. Maybe not. But trump won the popular vote last election cycle and has always enjoyed a fairly substantial base. A base that penalizes conservatives who worked against him by removing them from power. You cannot ignore the role that the people played in bringing about the current state of affairs. We are getting what people voted for.

                Btw the checks do still work. They work in lower courts as they apply the law without regard to partisanship. They, surprisingly, work in grand juries. And they work for non MAGA states to the extent that our federalized system gives more influence to local governments. Where they have failed is where maga politicians enjoy wide support.

                • Daftydux@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  23 hours ago

                  The point Im making is that checks and balances were not intended to hinge on the will of the people. They were supose to protect the structure of government themselves.