Due Process of the law is important, until the result isn’t what we like.
And rather than encouraging the crafting/shaping of legislation, for which a process exists in American democracy, we’ll just shortcut to defiance and place corporations whose fiduciary duties are ultimately to shareholders, not the “People”, above domestic law when it suits our interest.
I guess I’m the only one who has grown up in a martial law country, worked in the political process for an emergent democracy, studied law, interned on both the Hill and for a federal district court judge, and deployed to multiple failed states, to realize why Due Process is important as a bulwark against Rule by Man v rule of law.
It’s meant to limit arbitrary action by “strongmen” aka dictators, so its only ironic now that the masses are the ones finding it oh so inconvenient …
There’s a way to do things if you believe that a constitutional democracy (that permits appeals of judicial orders, even) for all its flaws, remains the better system than say, what Russia has.
Somehow just championing outright defiance is all surface reaction.
We don’t think broadly, deeply, and hard anymore.
And if “Due Process” itself sounds like an unfamiliar term, then ….
“Sighs, louder than words”
The strength of a democracy relies on just how well its citizenry understands how its government is designed. American democracy is more fragile than ever:
Criticism of the court “doesn’t bother me at all,” Roberts said, as long as it is not based on a misunderstanding of how the court differs from the political branches.
“In fact, our ruling is that whoever does get to decide this or that is allowed to do it, and that it’s not unconstitutional, that it’s consistent with the law,” Roberts said. “But we often have no policy views on the matter at all, and that’s an important distinction.”