Conway Sees 'End Of Constitutional Order' When Trump Defies Courts
George Conway predicted that Donald Trump would engage in a constitutional showdown that could spell the end of U.S. democracy.
Vice President J.D. Vance argued Sunday that federal courts “aren’t allowed” to limit the president's “legitimate power," after a judge temporarily blocked Elon Musk and other political appointees from accessing sensitive data and payment systems at the Treasury Department. Conway told MSNBC's Morning Joe the issue would likely force a constitutional clash.
"J.D. Vance is an embarrassment to the law school that I attended," Conway said. "But the fact of the matter is, he's telling us something that we should have already known, and last week I said it. They are not going to obey court orders, they have decided that they are going to push the boundaries on executive power by basically infringing on the Article 1 power of Congress, and they are violating statutory, they're violating the text of the Constitution in the birthright citizenship issue.
"They are violating the text of statutes by having DOGE run around and do all the things that they've been doing, the executive orders, there's no reason that this government that has decided not to obey the laws and the Constitution of the United States is going to obey a court order and, as you know, having practiced law there's really only one way that courts can enforce their orders when somebody is being contumacious and refusing to obey an order, and that's to send the U.S. Marshals out to take somebody in and to hold them in contempt or to otherwise enforce court orders."
"Well, who does the U.S. Marshals Service work for?" Conway added. "The U.S. Marshals Service is part of the United States Department of Justice. It reports to Donald J. Trump, and what's going to happen here, mark my words, is that at some point, they are going to basically tell the United States Marshals Service, do not enforce any of these orders, we will not obey them, and you are not to enforce them and, once that happens, I mean, I hope it doesn't happen, but I know in my heart that it will, our 236-year experiment in the federal rule of law, in democratic self-governance for the United States of America, in American constitutionalism, is essentially over."
Conway didn't see any institutional bulwark against Trump's abuse of the rule of law.
"The only recourse is to go out on the streets and march," Conway said. "That is the only recourse. The courts have no mechanism to enforce their orders other than through the United States Marshals Service, and that's through the Department of Justice, thus through the executive branch. The reason why we obey court orders is because the executive branch complies with court orders. If the executive branch does not comply with court orders and makes a point of saying that we will not comply with court orders, the rule of law, as far as the federal government is concerned, is over, and that is something we need to start focusing on and discussing, because that's where these people will go."
"There is no logical stopping point for them, and this is, you know, the only recourse will be for people to get out and say, we want the rule of law, we want a government that obeys the law, and that's going to require people to go out on the streets, because that is, there is no other alternative," he added.
- YouTube
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
Kamala Harris Grills DHS Chief On Racist Remarks And White Nationalist Threat
Reprinted with permission from Alternet.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) sparred with Homeland Security secretary Kirstjen Nielsen over the president’s racist remarks — and the administration official’s apparent support for those views.
Nielsen said earlier Tuesday during testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the president was simply repeating an observation about hard-working Norwegian immigrants, but Harris said Trump was unfavorably comparing them to African and Haitian immigrants.
“You spoke of them, according to the president, as the people of Norway — well, you know, they work very hard — the inference being the people of the 54 states of Africa and Haiti do not,” Harris said. “That is a fair inference.”
She then blasted Nielsen’s claim under oath that she was not aware that Norway was a majority white nation.
“You run the Department of Homeland Security,” Harris continued, “and when you say you don’t know if Norway is predominantly white when asked by a member of the United States Senate, that causes me concern about your ability to understand the scope of your responsibilities and the impact of your words — much less the policies that you promulgate in that very important department.”
Harris asked Nielsen why she ignored domestic terrorist attacks by white supremacists in her opening remarks about security threats faced by the U.S. — and she said the omission was “deeply troubling.”
“You must understand the inference, the reasonable inference, that the American public is drawing from the words you speak much less the words of the president of the United States,” Harris said.
Nielsen later complained that Harris had unfairly drawn conclusions based on her testimony.
“If you don’t mind, it’s not a fair inference to say that my comments about Norway were in contrast to any other country,” Nielsen said. “What I was describing was the president’s views upon meeting with the prime minister, and what I was quoting was what he was told in meeting with the Norwegian delegation. That’s what he repeated, words that he repeated that I repeated. It was not in contrast. With respect to white supremacy, we expanded our prevention efforts in the Department of Homeland Security to ensure we in fact are going after violence of any kind, any kind is not appropriate and I will not allow it to occur if it’s within our authority to stop.”
Harris made one brief response before ceding the floor.
“Mr. Chairman, I would just ask that the record — so we can all review it — will reflect in the opening statements when discussing challenges to our homeland in terms of security, the white supremacist threat was not mentioned,” Harris said.