Fear and Obey

When addressing the Supreme Court this past Monday in the case of Trump v. Slaughter, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that a president requires absolute power and control over all members of the Executive Branch, including the power to fire the heads of independent agencies, in order to fulfill the mandate given to him by the voters who put him in power. In response to a question from Justice Kavanaugh, Mr. Sauer emphasized the importance of this power, saying that:

"... the President's removal power is what is dictated by the Constitution, that the President must have the power to control and that these agencies -- the one who has the power to remove is the one who -- is the person that they have to fear and obey."*

Fear and obey.

These three words summarize the implications of the so-called unitary executive theory beloved by the administration, and illustrate the reason we need to remember why we declared independence from a king 250 years ago.

Kings and dictators rule by fear to enforce obedience, because they have no legitimacy other than the raw power that keeps them in office. In the United States, until the dawn of Der Furor's reign, presidents generally ruled by listening and responding to the needs and desires of the voting public ... both those who voted against them and those who voted for them. Der Furor has made it abundantly clear on many occasions that he is interested only in the needs, desires, and welfare of those who voted for him ... and that only so long as they continue to unquestioningly support him.

This is the future that looms as the Supreme Court debates this case. It has already granted Der Furor immunity from oversight and legal accountability in the case of Trump v United States**, and it will continue this march to dictatorship if it finds, as it appears likely to do, that he has the power to fire any executive branch employee at any time, for any reason (or none). For a superb analysis of where this could all go, read this article by Harry Litman in the Talking Feds Substack, which concludes,

"The Court will destabilize the architecture of modern governance and then step back as if it had merely rearranged the furniture. The cost of this rollback of much of the administrative state will be borne by all the people who have greatly benefited from the political insulation and expertise of independent agencies for the last 100 years – that is, all of us."

Fear and obey. 

Next time you cast a vote, consider whether this is the sort of future you really want for your children. And my grandchildren.

Have a good day. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

* Trump v. Slaughter transcript, page 55, lines 10-15.

** Certainly the most aptly-named SCOTUS case ever.