America’s Enabling Act moment: Congress’ coming denouement and the Reichstag test
One court has ruled that he defied the Constitution’s 14th Amendment that defines citizenship and two other courts – so far – have put on hold his freeze on congressionally-authorized spending, his attempt to usurp the Article 1, power of the purse, rights of Congress. Here we see an ongoing parallel with how Hitler chose to govern, a parallel that must inevitably lead to a denouement in which we will learn whether Trump’s America goes the way of continued democracy or the hellish way of Hitler’s Germany.
Two months after Hitler became Chancellor in 1933, he, like Trump today, disregarded his country’s Constitution. In March of 1933, with the National Socialist Party shy of a majority in the Reichstag, Hitler sought and obtained a two-thirds majority vote in the chamber that passed what we know as the Enabling Act. That act stripped the Reichstag’s members of the authority given to them by the voters. The Enabling Act allowed Hitler to override laws passed by the legislature; it allowed him to make laws himself; it allowed him to ignore the Constitution; it allowed him to ban and jail his political opponents. It made Hitler the dictator of Germany. All of this was done with proper procedure and behind the veil of the seemingly best of intentions. Hitler did not unilaterally declare himself dictator. Rather, he and the Nazi Party said that all they wanted was to restore Germany’s lost stature and its people’s well-being. The National Socialists, put plainly, wanted to make Germany great again.
The House and the Senate, both with small Republican majorities, may soon be compelled to face the choice that the Reichstag faced in March 1933. When the courts rule against Donald Trump’s efforts to strip away those sections of the Constitution that he doesn’t like, such as the 14th Amendment’s language on birthright citizenship, then President Trump will have to make a momentous decision. Does he prefer the rule of law over his own desires, or is he prepared to put his own preferences ahead of a ruling by the Supreme Court against his effort to eliminate birthright citizenship or his effort to grant to himself legislative and appropriations authority as Hitler did through the Enabling Act?
One court has ruled that he defied the Constitution’s 14th Amendment that defines citizenship and two other courts – so far – have put on hold his freeze on congressionally-authorized spending, his attempt to usurp the Article 1, power of the purse, rights of Congress. Here we see an ongoing parallel with how Hitler chose to govern, a parallel that must inevitably lead to a denouement in which we will learn whether Trump’s America goes the way of continued democracy or the hellish way of Hitler’s Germany.
Two months after Hitler became Chancellor in 1933, he, like Trump today, disregarded his country’s Constitution. In March of 1933, with the National Socialist Party shy of a majority in the Reichstag, Hitler sought and obtained a two-thirds majority vote in the chamber that passed what we know as the Enabling Act. That act stripped the Reichstag’s members of the authority given to them by the voters. The Enabling Act allowed Hitler to override laws passed by the legislature; it allowed him to make laws himself; it allowed him to ignore the Constitution; it allowed him to ban and jail his political opponents. It made Hitler the dictator of Germany. All of this was done with proper procedure and behind the veil of the seemingly best of intentions. Hitler did not unilaterally declare himself dictator. Rather, he and the Nazi Party said that all they wanted was to restore Germany’s lost stature and its people’s well-being. The National Socialists, put plainly, wanted to make Germany great again.
The House and the Senate, both with small Republican majorities, may soon be compelled to face the choice that the Reichstag faced in March 1933. When the courts rule against Donald Trump’s efforts to strip away those sections of the Constitution that he doesn’t like, such as the 14th Amendment’s language on birthright citizenship, then President Trump will have to make a momentous decision. Does he prefer the rule of law over his own desires, or is he prepared to put his own preferences ahead of a ruling by the Supreme Court against his effort to eliminate birthright citizenship or his effort to grant to himself legislative and appropriations authority as Hitler did through the Enabling Act?
