• Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Some systems, though, have actual mechanisms for enforcement attached to them. But apparently none of that was included in the legal framework that the entire country is built on.

    “Hey! You can’t do that! That very clearly violates Constitutional law.”

    “Oh, yeah? What are you going to do about it?”

    (checks Constitution) “Oh…uhhh. I guess nothing?”

    • a9cx34udP4ZZ0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      “Hey! You can’t do that! That very clearly violates Constitutional law.”

      “Oh, yeah? What are you going to do about it?”

      (checks Constitution) “Oh…uhhh. I guess nothing?”

      Impeachment, that’s what they’d do about it. But that would require politicians who do their job and also uphold the constitution. If the question is: what happens when everyone involved breaks the law and doesn’t do their job?

      The answer is one of two things: the people vote them out.

      If they are voted out but refuse to cede power peacefully, we end up with violence.

      Nothing about the checks and balances are broken, what’s broken is the percentage of the population that just doesn’t care their representative isn’t actually doing their job.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Mechanisms of enforcement still need enforcers who respect the rule of law. If the enforcers stop respecting the rule of law and prefer to play power politics then the won’t help you.

      Enforcers are part of the honour system. If they aren’t honourable then the system breaks down.

      • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Except in this case…there are no enforcers. At all.

        There is no mechanism in place to actually enforce a court ruling, if the executive branch decides to ignore it. There is no mechanism in place to enforce legislation that’s been passed by Congress, if the executive branch decides to ignore it. There aren’t even any mechanisms in place to enforce Constitutional amendments that should actively restrict the executive branch’s actions. They had a lot to say about what the executive branch should not be allowed to do…but they seemingly forgot to include any way of ensuring they would be held accountable, if they didn’t follow the rules.

        There are literally NO “checks and balances” in place to enforce anything if the executive branch decides to ignore the other two branches of government. It’s like passing legislation that declares murder a crime…but not including any consequences for actually committing it.