Outrage after JD Vance claims judges are not allowed to check executive power
Link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/10/jd-vance-judges-trump
Though this article is not inherently economic, I think it poses an interesting question in regard to rule of law which relates to some of our in-class analysis of the United States markets.
Within this article, the Vice President of the United States JD Vance attempts to analogize judges telling generals how to conduct their armies in tactical strategy to that of judge’s checking executive power. While it is true that the President has the power to issue executive orders, it is also true that judges have the power to check them and strike them down if considered unconstitutional. For our purposes, we only need to turn to article III of the Constitution and if that doesn’t satisfy we have a nation’s history worth of lawful precedent.
This attempt to dismantle the court’s legitimacy in a time where things are already uncertain with a flurry of decisions flying out every day, is certainly just a political jab, but has far greater consequences. The courts and the rule of law derive their power from their legitimacy. Without it, there is truly no power. This is why countries with no rule of law score so low on human development indexes and companies choose to not operate here. Rule of law applies to everyone including the government.
Additionally, yes it is true that court’s are not immune to folly or human error and thus it is the responsibility of the people to hold them accountable. However, this is not the case. A judge cannot simply strike anything they please down. What they’re doing is using the law and the safeguards/systems in place to ensure that orders comply with laws.
Furthermore, like most people, Trump has gone out of his way to applaud the Court’s when they rule in his favor. The rule of law is not an institution one can pick and choose. I think the dismantling of Court legitimacy will have serious consequences in terms of the nation’s health and economy.
5 comments:
After skimming over the article it is interesting that even our own Vice President is unwilling to accept the simple truth of checks and balances. The exact reason our founding fathers created the idea of the checks and balances is to prevent one branch from becoming too powerful. Some speculate that is what the current executive branch is attempting to do. The Supreme Court has had this power of judicial review since Marbury v. Madison in 1803. It would be very interesting to see how 200+ years of precedent would get overturned.
I just do not understand how someone gets this far in a political career with a belief system like this. The Republican party has become the representation for "true American people" and having its second in command disrespect one of the key pillars of the country seems like a complete contradiction for everything they claim to stand for.
This is insane. I wish I could say that it is surprising that he said this. I have not been happy with any of the leadership selections that President Trump has made but Vance is definitely a low point. I don't understand how he can claim to love America so much but seems to hate our system.
After reading the article and your comments, I think that undermining judicial review could create significant uncertainty in the business environment. This uncertainty might deter both domestic and foreign investment. As a result, businesses may hesitate to expand, and foreign investors might view the USA as riskier, and will take their capital elsewhere. The reduction in investment could slow economic growth, reduce job creation, and weaken the USA's global competitiveness. Ultimately, I think that a compromised judiciary could hurt the country's economic health and prosperity.
JD Vance’s statement undermines judicial independence and the separation of powers, which could weaken the rule of law and erode public trust in legal institutions. I wonder how businesses and markets might respond to the increased political uncertainty if judicial oversight is diminished.
Post a Comment