Luttig: “A rebuke from the nation’s highest court . . . could well cripple Mr. Trump’s presidency and tarnish his legacy.
Former-Judge Luttig wrote a guest essay in the New York Times, titled “It’s Trump vs. the Courts, and It Won’t End Well for Trump.” The essay concludes with these two paragraphs:
If the president oversteps his authority in his dispute with Judge Boasberg, the Supreme Court will step in and assert its undisputed constitutional power “to say what the law is.” A rebuke from the nation’s highest court in his wished-for war with the nation’s federal courts could well cripple Mr. Trump’s presidency and tarnish his legacy.
And Chief Justice Marshall’s assertion that it is the duty of the courts to say what the law is will be the last word.
I think every sentence is demonstrably incorrect. First, the Court has no power to “assert” its own authority. The Court lacks the power of the sword or purse.
Second, I can say with a high degree of certainty that a “rebuke” from the Supreme Court would do little to “cripple Mr. Trump’s presidency and tarnish his legacy.” As for the “legacy,” if two impeachment trials, an alleged insurrection, and feder
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
