,
3 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Going to write abt this at more length later. But arguments like Goldsmiths, in addition to having a number of leaps of logic, show up the limitations and failing of these theories of maximal executive power. Pushed to their limits, which is largely the point, they arrive ....
2/ at what are basically reductio ad absurdums in which the President is essentially a dictator with untrammeled and unreviewable power based on a couple clauses in the constitution. If you approach these passages as logic problems you can get there. But the logic ....
3/ of the document and the historical context makes quite clear that the authors of the document never contemplated such absolute, uncivic power. It’s an edifice that collapses on close inspection, which is the nature of reductio ad absurdums.
