Why is this so concerning? It's OK to argue about
whether the judge should or shouldn't have issued
is apparently attempting to delegitimize our
federal judiciary by calling
Judge James Robart, a George W.
Bush-appointed judge, a "so-called" judge while
arguing that his decision is "ridiculous."
Let's be blunt, because the stakes demand it: An
independent federal judiciary is our last, best
hope at preventing Trump from violating the US
Constitution and illegally grabbing power. And
Trump has to understand that, hence his attempt
to undermine it.
Trump has made the media -- which is a watchdog
of our presidents -- a focus of his attacks,
calling them "dishonest," claiming they peddle
"fake news" and even recently labeling them
result is that when the media calls out Trump's
lies and presents objective facts to counter
him, his followers will likely dismiss the media
reports and instead side with Trump.
Then Trump went after our intelligence agencies
because he didn't agree with their views on
Russia's involvement in our recent election.
lashed out, calling these agencies, charged
with gathering information for our national
security, "disgraceful" and accusing them of
leaking information, comparing it to "something
that Nazi Germany would have done."
Trump has clearly begun the process of
destroying their credibility so if they come
forward in the future to oppose his views or
offer facts to undermine his position, he will
tell his followers they also aren't to be
And now Trump, who attacked a judge during his
campaign, citing his Mexican heritage, has
turned on our judiciary again. But this time
it's far more disturbing given Trump is not a
candidate, but president of the United States.
The rationale must be assumed to be the same,
namely that Trump wants to delegitimize the
judiciary so that court decisions Trump
disagrees with will be viewed by his followers
as at the least horribly partisan, or at worst
It's frightening to think where this could lead.
For example, when the United States Supreme
Court ruled in the historic case of Brown v.
Board of Education that racial segregation in
our public schools was unconstitutional, it took
then-President Dwight Eisenhower to
implement that decision
Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus had refused to follow
the Court's decision and instead surrounded an
all-white high school in his state with National
Guard troops to prevent its integration.
Eisenhower responded by federalizing the
Arkansas National Guard to enforce the Supreme
Court's seminal decision and allow black
students to attend the school.
Would Trump do the same if he had passionately
disagreed with the Court's decision or would he
simply ignore it while attacking the legitimacy
of our judiciary, sparking a constitutional
crisis? And would certain Trump-supporting
federal agency heads, or even federal officers,
refuse to follow court orders (or at least do it
very slowly) because Trump has convinced them
the federal judiciary's decisions cannot be
no doubt Trump supporters are very loyal to him
personally. Keep in mind that Trump infamously
bragged that he could even
shoot a person on Fifth Avenue in New York
and his supporters would still be on his side.
And according to a
CNN/ORC poll, while Trump has only a 44%
approval rating overall, 90% of Republicans
think he's doing a good job
Founding Fathers enshrined a separation of
powers in our Constitution so that there would
be inherent checks and balances to avoid a
situation where a president could become a king.
After all, the Founders had just risked life and
limb rebelling against the King of England.
concerted attacks to delegitimize our media, our
intelligence community and now our federal
judiciary would have no doubt alarmed them. And
it should be terrifying to every American who
truly believes in our Constitution and in the
promise of America.