A nation of morons

The disturbing hypocrisy of July 4 celebrations have prompted me to write on any number of previous years—stretching back over a decade—about the obliviousness of Americans to the seemingly invisible rise of fascism in their midst.

The pervasive ignorance that grips this country, however, seems impenetrable.

Rather than whip myself into a frenzy this year, I took advantage of a day off work to meditate, play some music, workout, and prioritize my health. It was a fun day.

Waking up from a rare nap to the sound of “bombs bursting in air” (for the crass entertainment of sheeple seemingly unacquainted with LED art) felt like a fitting metaphor for this historical moment.

Today’s article will dive into a recent decision by the Supreme Court and explain the depths of its depravity. The president deserves all the opprobrium that his mendacity invites. But there is a profound danger in mistaking his trees for the more enduring post-constitutional forest.

Yet another travesty at the Supreme Court

Last week, the Supreme Court handed down a pivotal decision with grave consequences for the lives of millions of people, as well as the constitutional balance among powers theoretically separated across various (e.g., legislative, judicial, and executive) branches. If there is any justice in this world, Trump v. Casa will live in infamy.

I wrote a few weeks ago, reflecting on a different set of the Court’s decisions, that:

The executive wields the power of the sword, and Congress the power of the purse. The courts have only the power of the pen, which relies in turn on respect from the other branches.

Last week’s decision entailed the bizarre spectacle of the judiciary turning on itself, limiting its own power and giving the executive branch greater sway—at a particularly dangerous time in our nation’s history.

Most news coverage of the decision understandably focused on its subject matter: the constitutional promise of birthright citizenship embedded in the 14th Amendment ratified after the Union victory in the Civil War.

The Court essentially re-litigated the central legal outcome of the War, but you might not have heard it described that way since the particular decision it overturned was an 1898 case granting citizenship to Wong Kim Ark, who was born to Chinese non-citizen immigrant parents living in San Francisco.

In any case, the decision left the underlying result of Trump’s challenge to birthright citizenship unclear for the moment while the case returns to lower courts. But it went even further than throwing the result of the Civil War into the proverbial air, by also flipping a key constitutional principle on its head and calling into question the success of the War for Independence.

The judiciary v. itself

The constitutional design and separation of powers rely on the branches of government defending their own interests vis-a-vis the others. When the branches give away their powers, however, they essentially play into the fears of our founders, who anticipated hyper-partisanship, the tendency of the executive branch to aggress on the spheres of the other branches, and the corresponding need for judicial independence and supremacy.

Despite their racism and misogyny, the founders were talented architects of a constitutional system that, two-and-a-half centuries later, is being dismantled and contorted by the people charged with protecting it.

Congressional abdication of the legislative function, and routine institutional deference to the executive branch, have grown routine, though no less offensive. It was the underlying reason animating my campaigns for Congress over the course of six years against a senior (and corrupt) dynastic congressional leader.

Share

The spectacle of the Supreme Court hamstringing its own branch of government is grotesque, only all the more so given the institutional contortions necessary to contrive today’s majority. It not only abandons the oath of office in practice, but has actively weaponized itself against the constitutional design the Justices been charged by 400 million people with upholding.

There’s a particular irony in the Court’s latest decision limiting federal courts, apparent in the sharp contrast with its ruling last year that empowered judges to overrule executive agencies by overturning the Chevron doctrine. Could it be so simple that the Court empowers the executive branch under Republican presidents while restraining it under Democrats? The shoe of politicized “justice” certainly seems to fit, damning the judicial exercise as a naked demonstration of power inconsistent with the Constitution.

For better or worse, the right wing revolution underway in Washington extends far beyond the White House, and ultimately, includes the Supreme Court charged with defending the Constitution from the political branches that were co-opted long ago.

Words frankly fail to convey the depth of my disdain for whatever passes for law or governance in this country. It pains me to witness so many seemingly smart people so ignorantly invite their own subjugation.

However you may have celebrated July 4, please abandon any pretense that our nation’s founding values enjoy any respect today. As the United States declares war on the world—and itself—this would be a fine time to mourn, rather than celebrate.

Paid subscribers can read some thoughts about Zohran Mamdani, the Democratic Socialist nominee of the Democratic Party to serve as the next Mayor of New York City, that I posted as a comment on another writer’s Substack column. I plan to write more in the coming weeks about Mamdani and the growing backlash to his inspiring primary victory over a powerful corporate establishment...