Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

[flagged]



See here, for example: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/09/us/politics/vance-trump-f...

It’s one of the latest examples. In this case it’s amplified by Vance, but he’s been saying that for quite a while now, with his ideas of presidential immunity. And it’s all there in Project 2025.


Paywalled.

vance quote from 2021 -

> Vance said that if Trump became president again, "I think what Trump should do, if I was giving him one piece of advice: Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, and replace them with our people. And when the courts stop you, stand before the country and say, 'The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.'"[14][49] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin


Here you go: https://archive.ph/3o6Nf

It’s also all over the internet if you care


https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43000640 is an article about Vance saying it, like, two days ago. (You're going to have to have showdead on to see the link, though.)

And he didn't quite say that the judiciary can't check the executive. He said that the judiciary can't check the "legitimate power" of the executive. (Of course, that completely misses that the judiciary checks the executive precisely by ruling that something is outside the legitimate power of the executive...)


> He said that the judiciary can't check the "legitimate power" of the executive.

Where the president decides what is legitimate or constitutional. It’s a fig leaf.


That's where the battle line is currently drawn. Does the president get to decide that, or does the judge? Is it a fig leaf, or is it a real constraint?

There fundamentally is going to be conflict in any system of checks and balances. Neither the SCOTUS nor POTUS get to unilaterally decide the limits.

Trump hasn't been following convention, but that doesn't mean he's wrong. We also can't just assume he's right. Having the 3 branches hash out a balance is perfectly reasonable and confirms the system is working as intended.


Vance has been the most explicit about it.

In 2021, Vance said Trump in his second term should fire “every civil servant in the administrative state” and, “when the courts stop you, stand before the country like Andrew Jackson did and say, ‘The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.’” (This refers to an apparently apocryphal quote from the country’s seventh president, who declined to enforce a Supreme Court ruling.)

https://otter.ai/u/hhDAbcaDvHzdm-oO-C9_S4Ip8FQ

Vance was asked last year if he was explicitly saying the president should defy such an order, and he told Politico, “Yup.”

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/03/15/mr-maga-go...

In 2022, Vance suggested a president could disregard an “illegitimate ruling” in which the Supreme Court would say a president can’t fire a military general.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jd-vance-defends-trump-claim...

As for trump, there's the actions where he's violating court orders already

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.277...


Project 2025 is the blueprint for this.

JD Vance is also on TV all the time basically ignoring the most basic constitutional provisions, and Trump's pimp-daddy Musk is also ignoring the courts. This is a trend.


Vance's outspoken support for this is probably the main reason Trump picked him as his running mate even though he called Trump "America's Hitler."



Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: