…There were two notable victories
for the rule of law, where excessive attempts to subvert democracy through the
legal system were successfully thwarted.
For the last six months, outside
the national corridors of power, one of the most insidious attacks on the heart
of our democracy — free and fair elections — has been playing out in North
Carolina. In
November, the Republican candidate for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme
Court, Judge Jefferson Griffin, lost a close race to the incumbent justice
Allison Riggs.
Even
after two recounts confirmed Riggs’s 734-vote victory, Griffin would
not relent. Instead, he filed hundreds of challenges to get 65,000 legally cast
ballots tossed out. Despite Griffin’s protestations, these votes — which
included ballots from service members and military families stationed overseas
— were cast within the state’s established election rules that were counted for
every other statewide race in North Carolina. Griffin wanted the courts to
change the goal posts after the fact, so he could be declared the winner.
Finally, after a winding road
through state and federal court, a Trump
appointed federal district court judge ruled against Griffin’s attempt
to discount ballots after they were counted, writing, “You establish the rules
before the game. You don’t change them after the game is done.” Griffin
subsequently conceded the race, instead of continuing to pursue an appeal,
ending this saga.
And then on Thursday, Donald
Trump was forced to pull
the nomination of Ed Martin to be the US Attorney for the District of
Columbia. Martin is a particularly odious and dangerous figure, a man who praises
and consorts with avowed Nazis — including someone who literally
dressed up as Hitler.
He has also bent over
backwards to
support convicted January 6th insurrectionists, raising funds for them,
then as their defense attorney, and even after taking office as the acting
chief federal prosecutor in the nation’s capital. During his short tenure in
the office, Martin abused the prosecutorial powers he was temporarily granted,
sending threatening
letters to Democratic politicians and scientists, among others,
and refusing
to investigate a credibly accused Republican congressman.
Martin’s nomination proved a
bridge too far for Trump’s Republican allies, as conservative
voices publicly expressed their opposition to his nomination — most
notably and openly Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, a member of the
Judiciary Committee. With Martin’s nomination sinking, Trump withdrew his name
from the ring.
Given Martin’s actions as acting
US attorney in DC, and his extreme public statements of affiliations, he looked
poised to use the rule of law to attack his political opponents and protect
allies. Indeed, Martin in many respects represents the very
weaponization of the DOJ that Trump and his allies falsely and
hypocritically decry.
These two victories for the rule
of law were sharp failures, and emblematic of a hubristic autocratic overreach
that has turned sour for Trump and his allies — a phenomenon that has played
out in a variety of areas. While DOGE wreaked havoc upon across services and
organizations that millions of people rely on, it abjectly failed at its own
self-stated mission. The Washington Post reported that one of DOGE’s
inspirations has turned against
it, comparing it to an “orchestra of chimpanzees.”
None of that lessens the
significant harms the clumsy would-be autocrats continue to dish out. Even with
the defeat of Ed Martin, Trump’s replacement is no Robert Jackson. The new
interim US Attorney for the District of Columbia, and therefore one of the most
powerful attorneys in the country, is Fox
News host Jeanine Pirro.
The relief felt by many of us at
this development is a true measure of just how bad this administration is, and
the expectations we have for it. And Trump has announced Martin
will work in the Justice Department, but in a position that doesn’t
require Senate confirmation. It’s a mixed bag.
And as one attack on the vote
rightfully fails in one state, a different dangerous attack ramps up in
another. The Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced on Thursday the
arrest of six individuals — including five public officials, one of
whom is a judge — for a supposed “vote harvesting” scheme.
Paxton brought these charges
under Texas’s S.B. 1 law, parts of which have already been ruled
unconstitutional by a GW
Bush-appointed federal judge. The
5th Circuit stayed that ruling, which allowed Paxton to continue his
criminal investigation. The merits of the case will be played out in court, but
Paxton’s mimicry of the Trump DOJ’s
arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan in Wisconsin, gives rise to concerns that a
dangerous pattern could be developing, one of criminalizing and arresting
officers of the court in order to intimidate them into submission.
We also see an effort to force submission within the federal government itself. Two staffing decisions – one firing and one hiring — tell the dangerous story of the devaluation of expertise and competence in this administration. There is a concerted effort to stamp out any bit of dissent and to reward obsequious loyalty to Trump.
One day after the FEMA director, Cameron Hamilton, told Congress—unsurprisingly given the role it plays in emergencies—that it would be a mistake to eliminate the agency, the White House fired him.
Meanwhile, the newly
appointed Surgeon General appears to be shockingly unqualified: her
license to practice medicine in Oregon lapsed
in 2019 yet she freely offers eccentric, unsupported, RFK-aligned
advice, while claiming that she left her medical training “to focus on how to keep people out of
the operating room.”
Members from both sides of the
aisle were vexed by the decision to appoint a non-practicing doctor as Surgeon
General. To make matters worse, when the president was confronted with these
facts by the press, he sloughed off any responsibility for the choice,
betraying no knowledge about her specifically and claiming he picked her
because “Bobby” (RFK) thought
she was fantastic.
That rhetorical gambit by Trump –
disclaiming any responsibility by claiming ignorance – has become alarmingly
frequent. When asked whether, as president, he needed to “uphold the
Constitution,” he replied: “I don’t know”
— a concerning answer given that is the core of the oath he took when sworn in
as President.
He has also appeared to be
unaware of his own government’s actions events, most recently saying he didn’t
know whether his Administration was sending
migrants to Libya. All of this suggests an out-of-touch president, content
with the trappings of power, but unable or unwilling to administer it or take
responsibility for his actions.
Until then,
The Contrarian, the Democracy
Index team:
This week we saw the
consequences of autocratic overreach. Although there are still heartbreaking
tragedies and dangers inflicted every day, it’s important to step back and see
where democracy has been resilient.
That is what we do in this
week’s edition of the Democracy Index, as we also unveil our brand-new Visual
Index. We’ve broken it down into six key pillars: rule of law, free elections,
national security, corruption, civil rights/public safety, and free press/disinformation.
Every week, we take the
temperature of these metrics in an attempt to gauge the overall health of our
democracy. You can explore the full,
interactive graphic — and our analysis of the week’s developments
follow below.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.