After Donald Trump sacked the acting attorney general, are America’s checks and balances under threat?
Dr Brian Klaas, fellow in comparative politics at the London School of Economics, says Yes.
Students of American democracy around the world learn that the brilliance of the system lies in three magic words: checks and balances. The problem is that the checks and balances themselves are not magic.
America’s democratic institutions are only as resilient and robust as the people who enforce them during times of distress. They are facing a time of distress right now. And yet core aspects of those democratic checks and balances are being tested like never before.
Suddenly, under the Trump presidency, financial conflicts of interest have become a partisan issue – Republicans seem not to worry about them, while Democrats do. The same is true for respect for the media, rooting policy statements in fact, or in using religion as a basis for determining immigration status.
This polarisation of core American principles threatens checks and balances like never before in modern American history. It has only been 12 days. But Congress, the courts, and the constitution are being tested.
Kurt Schlichter, an author, lawyer and retired US army colonel, says No.
The firing of Sally Yates was critical to restoring constitutional checks and balances. Her actions were an assault upon constitutional governance.
Under the Constitution, the judicial branch – the courts – pass on the constitutionality of congressional actions (laws) and executive actions. But Yates betrayed her oath to uphold the Constitution by attempting to take that power for herself as an unelected bureaucrat.
The role of the civil service is not to make its own independent determinations about policy or laws. The Constitution allocates that role. Instead, it must play its own part, by providing a defence of the government’s actions.
Her role as an attorney was to make the best possible case for her client. We would be shocked and disgusted at a lawyer who refused to defend an accused because she took upon herself the judge and jury’s role of determining the facts. Donald Trump’s action was not only right, it was absolutely necessary for the functioning of our government.