The Supreme Court Rules to Restore the Monarchy

A sarcastic column in the Washington Post looks at the insanity of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Donald Trump's immunity claim which seems to seek to restore a monarchy with little accountability or control over the president.  The dissenting justices recognized the abject danger opened by the ruling whereas the anti-democracy right wing majority seems to opening the door for the end of democracy and allowing someone like Trump with no honor and no morality to rule like a king.  Vladimir Putin must be applauding from afar. So to other despots around the world. The question now is whether democrats will use this ruling as a weapon in the manner Trump hopes to do should he regain the White House and begin his revenge campaign against anyone and everyone who has offended him or publicly recognized his moral bankruptcy. Be very afraid for the future.  Here are column excerpts:

Happy Fourth of July from the nine unelected magistrates of the Supreme Court! Great news: After a lot of clamor for the past 250-odd years, we are bringing back the monarchy!

Why should ruling the country in robes, unaccountable to anyone, be solely our province? We have really loved this level of unchecked power that allows us to do whatever we want, vacationing and flying flags willy-nilly until the moment of our deaths, and we felt it might be fun for the country if the president also got to experience this rush. . . . Consequences for your actions? No, thank you!

That’s why we issued the ruling we did in Trump v. United States. Sure, in the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton argued that “in England, the king is a perpetual magistrate … unaccountable for his administration, and his person sacred,” whereas in a republic, “every magistrate ought to be personally responsible for his behavior in office.” But he didn’t know what he was talking about! . . . Actually, the president should be unaccountable for his administration, and his person sacred. So we fixed it: You’re welcome, America!

Indeed, we studied the original intent of the Founders long and hard, and found something that should not have surprised anyone: A lot of them spent most of their lives as loyal citizens of a king! George Washington even fought in his army!

Why is this missing from the history books? Why are the Constitution and Declaration of Independence so unaccountably down on the notion of a singular, unrestrained executive? Just because the Founders soured on their ruler later in life should not turn the rest of us against this pleasant, efficient system.

“Isn’t that all acts you commit during your presidency?” you might wonder. Not at all! The president-king will be sure to respect the distinction and, when he wants to do crimes, say, “I’m taking off my president hat now and committing a crime as a random civilian!” Then, we’ll be able to prosecute them accordingly.

“Okay, but take, say, bribery. Obviously, bribes would not be offered to a random civilian; if they didn’t think you had power, they wouldn’t bother trying to bribe you. So isn’t it kind of impossible to take your president hat off there?” you might wonder. Well! Hmm. We are sure that will not happen! Just look again at how we ourselves are unaccountable and have done nothing bad!

There are just so many wonderful upsides to having an unaccountable executive who is above the law: much greater clarity if aliens arrive demanding to be taken to a leader; much less confusion for the attorney general when deciding whether to pursue the president’s individual vendettas or enforce the law; more military parades; fewer pesky elections; all the things we’ve been doing with our rollback of reproductive rights, just on an even broader scale; the ability to relax and know that some people are rulers and some people are ruled.

And best yet, when you’re inevitably paying your little bribes because you want to drive on the road, imagine: just the one smiling face on all the coins.