Poll of judges, lawyers sees grave Trump threat to rule of law

Sometimes it seems like the only thing standing between a functioning democracy and a full-blown Trumpian autocracy is a thin, black-robed line.

Although the Supreme Court in general and the conservative appeals courts in particular have bowed to President Trump and allowed him to do almost anything he wants, they have not completely given in to his insatiable ambition to gain more power. (As do the spineless Congressional Republicans.)

At the lower court level, judges have repeatedly ruled in ways aimed at checking Trump; especially when it comes to violating civil and constitutional rights in pursuit of his indiscriminate immigration network.

The administration’s tendency to slow its response to these decisions and ignore others that Trump feels he can safely downplay only adds to the perception of the president’s lawlessness and the sense that our judicial system is being strained toward something approaching breaking point.

Go ahead and dismiss these concerns as an over-exaggerated handshake or mindless anti-Trump ramblings from your friendly political columnist if you want. A new survey among legal professionals It finds widespread concern about the fragile state of our legal system, including from federal judges, top lawyers and scores of professors from the nation’s leading law schools.

And that’s not just the fear of many crude-minded liberals.

“The nation is as strong as its commitment to the rule of law,” said a Republican-appointed appeals judge. “The current president represents the greatest threat in decades.”

The survey was conducted by Bright Line Watch, a nonpartisan academic group that monitors the health and durability of American democracy, in conjunction with the Protecting Democracy Project at the UCLA School of Law.

The survey, conducted between mid-February and early March, included 21 federal judges, 113 lawyers, 193 law professors, 652 political scientists and a nationally representative sample of 2,750 Americans who participated anonymously.

What struck UCLA’s Rick Hasen, director of the Democracy Preservation Project, was that “there was significant consensus across the ideological spectrum and among judges, lawyers, and law professors that the rule of law in the United States was under tremendous pressure.” This consensus, he said, suggested “a real risk to democracy”.

Most legal experts agree that Trump has overused his executive authority; The majority doubts that the conservative-leaning Supreme Court will impartially hear cases involving the Trump administration. Experts also expressed concern about the politicization of law enforcement — Trump trying to persecute those he perceives as enemies — overreach by the executive branch and the failure of Congress or the Supreme Court to do more to rein in the rogue president.

About 8 in 10 respondents said federal officials somewhat or very often fail to comply with court orders, and nearly 9 in 10 said political appointees in Trump’s Justice Department mislead federal judges somewhat or very often.

Talk about contempt of court; Not to mention our vital system of checks and balances.

There was an unsurprising split between conservatives and liberals surveyed. (Legal conservatives, in the survey, were defined as those who said the Supreme Court should base its decisions on its understanding of the way the Constitution was originally written. Liberals, who made up the majority of respondents, were defined as those who said the court should base its decisions on what the Constitution means today.)

For example, conservatives were more likely than liberals to view former President Biden as a greater threat to the rule of law than Trump. Liberals saw more evidence than conservatives that Trump had politicized the Justice Department.

There were also differences between the legal professionals most closely involved with the judicial system and the public at large. Hasen said experts are more concerned about Trump’s excesses and threats to the rule of law.

The legal system is not something most people encounter every day, like gas prices or food prices. “Still,” Hasen said, “it’s one of those background things that really matters.”

From where?

Hasen put it this way: “Imagine that a dispute a person has with his neighbor is concluded before a judge in the court of first instance, and the judge decides not on the merits of the case, but on whether he is friends with one of the parties or dislikes people who resemble one of the parties.”

Now imagine this kind of corrupt, perverted justice system at large.

For example, Hasen said, “If people know that the government can successfully take revenge on people who criticize it, people will be less likely to criticize the government,” leaving the country worse off by silencing those who would hold its elected leaders accountable.

Or, say, if rioters invaded the U.S. Capitol and tried to steal an election, and instead of being punished, they received a cash payment from the federal government, what incentive might there be to comply with the law?

Fortunately – and there’s no need to cheer up a bit right now – all is not lost.

Hasen said people can “demand their elected representatives to take steps to ensure compliance with the rule of law” and insist that “the government insist on this.” [not] Play favorites or take revenge against perceived enemies.

This is the power people have when it comes to election time. That’s why voting is important.

A lot depends on the outcome in November; especially the sanctity and integrity of our legal system.

Keep this in mind when voting.