The US constitution is in peril. Civil and human rights are being trampled upon. The economy is in disarray.
At this rate, we will not make it through the second 100 days.
Federal judges in more than 120 cases so far have sought to stop Trump – judges appointed by Republicans as well as Democrats, some appointed by Trump himself – but the regime is either ignoring or appealing their orders. It has even arrested a municipal judge in Milwaukee amid a case involving an undocumented defendant.
Recently, Judge J Harvie Wilkinson III of the court of appeals for the fourth circuit – an eminent conservative Reagan appointee who is revered by the Federalist Society – issued a scathing rebuke to the Trump regime. In response to its assertion that it can abduct residents of the US and put them into foreign prisons without due process, Wilkinson wrote:
If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home? And what assurance shall there be that the Executive will not train its broad discretionary powers upon its political enemies? The threat, even if not the actuality, would always be present, and the Executive’s obligation to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed’ would lose its meaning.
i feel you, but i do not see any reason to think that any of these bad things are inextricably linked to the United States, i.e., the Constitution. To me, the core of the Constitution seems to be very compatible with Love, although the authors tried to cripple that message to suit incompatible interests, e.g., slavery.
After reading some parts of the Constitution again, i was disappointed by the mention of “Aid and Comfort” until i realized that the Constitution indicates that treason implies “Aid and Comfort” or declaring war against the United States, not that said “Aid and Comfort” is necessarily treasonous, which would necessarily imply persecution of religions of unconditional Love; in being unconditional, after all, Love does not discriminate by affiliation or past actions.
i do approve characterizing implementations of the United States as being afflicted with truly horrible things, though. This implementation has always had fascist-adjacent elements and, hell, has gone from being on the path to being the Mother of Exiles to just being the mama of all strays. But such hatred, such dehumanization is not aligned with the liberal spirit of the Constitution.
i welcome any disagreement here, and you are free to ask for any clarification.
The US constitution explicity enshrines the right to enslave people. I know of no other constitution with such a stipulation. All of the other rights you mention go out the window when people can just straight up be enslaved.
The great thing about the constitution is that it also has rules for how to fucking change it. That was one of earliest things that got changed.
i should have clarified that i was referring to the current incarnation of the Constitution, what with the amendments and all. The inclusion of slavery at all is horrible. i like non-cruel prison labor; anyone who is sincerely remorseful would love the chance to atone, but the labor must be voluntary. Compulsory anything is counter to Love. Punishment of any kind is counter to Love.
If you were thinking of the Thirteenth Amendment, then my only defense is that the Thirteenth Amendment does not specifically condone prison slavery, either, that prison slavery is undefined behavior, that the undefined behavior can serve as a means of easing people away from slavery, that, even with the exception, the Thirteenth Amendment did serve as a step in the right direction. The exception may be a compromise for people who wanted slavery for unconvicted and convicted people, thereby starting the process of easing into an incarnation which is free of anything resembling an endorsement of slavery of any kind.
In any case, an amendment to forbid all slavery is definitely in order and is thoroughly consistent with my understanding of the spirit of the Constitution.
The Constitution was written to enshrine Oligarchy, and sold as “Democracy” to those unwilling or unable to read and/or comprehend it. In the original, the only people with any rights and power were Rich, White, Males. The window dressing has changed over the decades, but the core remains. Rich White Males still own and operate the United States. There was no love in that document for anyone other than the Oligarchs.
