Is the nation facing a constitutional crisis?
“Sure are!” say any number of pundits. According to Adam Liptak of the New York Times, the question is not whether such a crisis exists, but rather how that crisis “will transform the nation.” Presumably, badly. And to his colleague Jamelle Bouie, the actions of President Trump are not just “unconstitutional,” they are “anti-constitutional,” because they “reject the basic premise of constitutionalism.” In other words, asking whether Trump’s actions are merely unconstitutional should trigger the response: “We should only be so lucky.”
The truth is less dramatic. We are not facing a constitutional “crisis.” Rather, we are seeing exactly the kind of inter-branch conflict our Constitution was designed to foster.
The level of discourse about a possible constitutional crisis would benefit if those wishing to opine were first required to read the Constitution. Not just the first ten amendments, commonly known as the Bill of Rights. The actual original un-amended document ratified in 1788.
Continue reading
toputitbluntly.com 