Most presidents have had some event to show such habits of character. Richard Nixon, for instance, was urged by his employees to easily ignore the Supreme Court docket ruling that advised him at hand over the recordings he had made. His employees mentioned, in essence, that the president might insist upon his authority as equal to that of the Supreme Court docket, even when that undermined the stability of powers between the chief and the judicial branches. Nixon disagreed together with his employees and selected to resign moderately than undermine the system itself.
What this implies, although, is that the best assure in opposition to presidential lawbreaking has been, for over 200 years, the presidential perception that the regulation – and the system that produces such regulation – is value taking critically. Most presidents have tried with kind of success to protect the norms and guidelines that represent the political system itself.
One of the best defence in opposition to wrongful presidential acts will be the election of presidents who’re virtuous sufficient to not do them or to withstand the temptation to do such acts.
Michael Blake is a Professor of Philosophy, Public Coverage, and Governance on the College of Washington. This commentary first appeared in The Dialog.
