ABA Defends Rule Of Law Against Entitled Billionaire And Yale Law Grad Who Didn’t Do His Con Law Readings

What is the major difference between a president and a king? Presidents just come from wealth or the right family, while kings come from wealth and the right family. Jokes aside — the main difference is that presidents are subject to the rule of law. The assumption since the Founding has been that the checks and balances of our three branches coupled with the rule of law would be the two anchors that would prevent presidents from becoming the kings that we fought a war’s worth of independence over. You know what happens when you make assumptions; Trump gets elected for a second time!

During the first Trump presidency it wasn’t uncommon to see headlines like “Trump Attacks on the Rule Of Law Reach a New Level.” Not to be outdone by himself, one of his first acts under his second term undermined the birthright citizenship guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. And he isn’t the only one undermining the two anchors — JD Vance took to X to show that he doesn’t have an even basic understanding of how judicial review works:

JD Vance, a Yale-educated lawyer and sitting VP, claims judges can’t check executive power. That’s literally their job. Courts overturned Nixon, Bush, and Trump. If judges couldn’t rule on executive actions, presidents would be kings. pic.twitter.com/N3hSV1muQJ— Alex Cole (@acnewsitics) February 9, 2025

I’ll take signs that JD Vance slept through the war powers module of Con Law for $400, Alex! When a person is this loud and wrong, you can usually depend on someone to step up and call out the stupidity. Unfortunately, we are living in one of the shithole-ier timelines and legally illiterate folks are coming out of the woodwork to support Trump & Co.

Look at this shit JD Vance is re-tweeting.
Who needs the appeals process when you can just decide that the decision is "lawless" and the judge can't "compel" you to do anything. WTF pic.twitter.com/mUJytSYHKA— Brenda Of The North