Inspired by Saul Steinberg's View of the World from 9th Avenue Ernest Miller has produced a graphic depiction of The Constitution According to Bush (.pdf).
A Personal Blog
by Michael Froomkin
Laurie Silvers & Mitchell Rubenstein Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Miami School of Law
My Publications | e-mail
All opinions on this blog are those of the author(s) and not their employer(s) unelss otherwise specified.
Who Reads Discourse.net?
Readers describe themselves.
Please join in.Reader Map
Recent Bluessky Posts- COVID not at a high level nationally but rate is increasing. (Rt over 1 in lots of places.) But of course we don't have data for Florida which operates on the "if we're not tracking it, people can't make us do anything about if" principe. www.cdc.gov/cfa-modeling... July 25, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Ok this is a little bit concerning.... July 25, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Jotwell Family: Rachel Rebouché, Criminal Claiming in Ban-State Abortion Law, JOTWELL (July 24, 2026), 1/2 family.jotwell.com/criminal-cla.... July 24, 2026 Jotwell
- By popular demand (yes, really) I've posted this year's recommendations for the Miami-Dade judicial elections on my blog. www.discourse.net/2026/07/2026... July 24, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Max is going to be dangerous, if he isn't already! July 24, 2026 Michael Froomkin
Recent Comments
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 52 other subscribers
I’m not a constitutional scholar, so where the hell does it say anywhere in the Constitution that the president can unilaterally and secretly assume dictatorial powers in his role as commander-in-chief? (I reference the infamous DOJ memo asserting that the commander-in-chief need honor no national or international laws, treaties, nor be bound by constitutional checks and balances if they would “impede the war effort”; i.e., dictatorship). Nor can I find it stated that such power can be bestowed by the legislative or judicial branches, assuming one might justify it via case law or legislation. That earlier CICs like Lincoln or FDR exceded their authority is irrelevant, as their precedents were illegal.
Am I reading too much into this, or have we just undergone a “shadow” coup? If so, why aren’t the president and his cronies being tried for treason?
“Treason” charges would require some evidence that Mr. Bush has made war on the United States, not merely that he has betrayed the country’s ideals.
A grand jury to investigate Rumsfeld for war crimes, however, would seem to be in order. In the unlikely event that Kerry grows balls, perhaps Rumsfeld could be arrested on inauguration day, and held as a illegal enemy combatant until the Republicans in Congress restore our civil liberties.
Thanks, Brian…
But why stop with Rummy–Kerry could bag the whole Republican Party along with Pat Robertson as “enemies of the state.” Pat, by the way, said God told him Bush would win in a landslide, so I guess Kerry’s balls are moot.