In late July, two professors issued a call for dictatorship. In an open letter to President Biden, Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet and San Francisco State University political scientist Aaron Belkin urged the President to
restrain MAGA [Supreme Court] justices immediately by announcing that if and when they issue rulings that are based on gravely mistaken interpretations of the Constitution that undermine our most fundamental commitments, the Administration will be guided by its own constitutional interpretations.
Apparently, the authors don’t consider the rule of law to be one of “our most fundamental commitments.” The letter argues that Biden should ignore Court rulings that he doesn’t like and reject the rule of law. The President, not the Court should determine what is Constitutional and what isn’t. While Progressives Regressives may think that this is an appropriate policy when their guy is in the White House, imagine the uproar if a Republican took this stance.
If the President can ignore Court rulings and unilaterally declare what is Constitutional, he becomes a de facto dictator. Any restrictions on his power are removed. He can rule as his whims dictate.
The open letter goes on to argue for “popular constitutionalism,” claiming “that courts do not exercise exclusive authority over constitutional meaning.” What is Constitutional should not be decided by the courts, but by “the people.”
On the one hand, the professors want the executive to have unlimited powers. On the other hand, they want to vest those powers to the majority. Whether unlimited powers are possessed by a single individual or the majority is a minor detail. In either case, the rulings of the Court are rendered moot.
It doesn’t matter whether dictatorial powers are held by a single individual or “the public.” In either case, the individual’s life is not his to live as he chooses.