How did it get to this point? After victory in the Cold War, the American model seemed impregnable. A generation later, Americans themselves are losing confidence in him. Irresponsible warmongering, the financial crisis and institutional decomposition have unleashed a ferocity in American politics that has made the presidential elections seem like existential bets. Americans have witnessed political leaders denouncing the integrity of their democracy. They have seen the attempt by some fellow citizens to block the transfer of power from one government to the next. They have good reason to wonder what degree of protection the system guarantees them against the authoritarian impulse that is emerging in the world.
The answer is that if Americans believe that their constitution alone can safeguard the republic from a Caesar on the Potomac, then they are too optimistic. The preservation of democracy depends today, as it always has, on the courage and convictions of countless people throughout the United States; especially, those in charge of writing and defending the laws.
The constitutional order is vulnerable. A would-be dictator can get started without disobeying the letter of the Constitution, because subsequent laws have created gaps large enough for troops to parade through. As a young country, the United States was worried not only about the emergence of a native despot, but also about the threat of powerful enemies, having just defeated one. Congresses granted presidents emergency powers to maintain order in times of crisis. Under the Insurrection Act, a president can deploy the army or navy against an internal uprising or when federal law is ignored. Presidents have invoked that authority 30 times: to break strikes, to overcome segregation and, most recently, to end the 1992 Los Angeles riots.
The Brennan Center, a think tank, lists 135 extraordinary powers that a president can invoke when declaring a national emergency; some of the most severe freeze bank accounts and shut down the Internet. The president can decide what is considered an emergency. More than 40 of these powers are still in force, some for years. Donald Trump took advantage of one to finance his border wall; Joe Biden, another to forgive student loans. Congress is supposed to consider ending emergencies every six months. He never has. He has also never impeached a president.
That turns complacency into a danger. And the same thing happens with alarmism, because an emergency, real or simulated, is the ally of the leaders. When they believed that the American project was at stake, even great presidents asserted extraconstitutional powers. During the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus; Franklin Roosevelt interned Americans without trial.
Among the greatest constitutional obstacles to a dictatorship is the XXII Amendment, which limits presidencies to two terms. However, what would happen if a determined autocrat filled the Pentagon with lackeys and, with military backing, refused to leave office? The United States has 247 years of history, but its constitution was copied in the 19th century by several young Latin American republics that ended up succumbing to the caudillos.
The lesson is that the support of the American project, like the support of any democracy, is not in the letter of the law, but in the values ??of citizens, judges and public officials. And the good news is that even the most determined, inventive and organized of would-be despots will have to fight to overcome them.
The military remains one of the healthiest institutions in the United States, and its ranks are filled with people conscious of the oath they have sworn to the Constitution. States have wealth and enormous authority over their affairs. The vast majority of police officers work for local and state officials, not the president. The press has become more partisan, but also values ??its independence, and remains too diffuse for a single party to control. The next president can increase his power to fire tens of thousands of officials, but that would still leave a “deep state” of about 3 million workers spread across hundreds of agencies and 15 departments. Those people could cause a lot of problems.
Americans rightly lament the erosion of norms, but abuse of executive power has sometimes given rise to new ones. After Richard Nixon resigned over Watergate, the Justice Department began making decisions regarding investigations and prosecutions without regard to the president’s wishes. Trump has said he will end all that, but any Caesar wannabe who invokes emergency powers or the Insurrection Act will still have to overcome the independence of the courts. The lawbreaker will also have to face resistance from professional prosecutors and the integrity of juries.
This year, presidential candidates have accused each other of trying to destroy American democracy. However, Biden is an institutionalist, with respect for the old ways of politics. Trump, who has fantasized about being a dictator, if only for a day, is different. His refusal to leave the White House in 2020 sparked the assault on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and caused a record number of lawmakers to oppose certifying the vote. Now, the suggestion that he might reject another defeat has raised the risk that congressional Republicans will try to block certification. For their part, some Democratic representatives have pointed to the possibility of not certifying a Trump victory on the basis that he disqualified himself as president by participating in an insurrection. And so a president’s disregard for a norm can end up eroding the foundations of the system as a whole.
Without a doubt, Trump is not up to the task of becoming a dictator, even if he wants to. He is too easily distracted, scatterbrained, and eager to avoid responsibilities. The greatest danger is that his disregard for norms and institutions will further diminish Americans’ faith in government. And that is important, because the American project depends on the people of it. Only a quarter of citizens say they are satisfied with democracy.
They have voted for change time and time again, but politicians continue to fail to meet their needs. “A republic, provided they are able to maintain it,” Benjamin Franklin is said to have responded when asked, upon leaving the Constitutional Convention, whether the founding fathers had created a monarchy or a republic. With the election approaching, it is only fair that ordinary Americans once again issue Franklin’s challenge to the many state and federal politicians who run his republic: Can they maintain it?
© 2024 The Economist Newspaper Limited. All rights reserved
Translation: Juan Gabriel López Guix
