RUTHFULLY YOURS

There are several points to be made in response.

First, no one, including Trump himself, has any idea who he would appoint. He could appoint Judge Judy or Jeanine Pirro because he’s seen them on TV. He could appoint his sister, who is a liberal Clinton appointee on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. It’s pretty certain that Trump, who thinks that judges sign “bills” rather than opinions or rulings, has not the foggiest conception of what qualities to look for in a judicial nominee.

Today, I talked to a conservative lawyer who put the pro-Trump case this way: “There is a 5 percent chance Trump would appoint someone good to the court — but there’s a 0% chance Hillary would.” Fair enough. But is a 5 percent chance of a good Supreme Court appointment really worth running all the other risks that a Trump presidency poses?

Let me remind you that Trump is a candidate who has not evinced the slightest regard for the rule of law or the basic norms of democracy. He routinely threatens anyone who opposes him with dire consequences — “be careful” he always says in the manner of “The Godfather.” He just as routinely threatens physical harm against peaceful demonstrators.

Last Wednesday, at a North Carolina rally, he said, as protesters were being led out, “They used to treat them very, very rough, and when they protested once, they would not do it again so easily,” before lamenting “we’ve become weak.” Asked on Friday about a physical altercation at one of his rallies, he said: “The audience hit back, and that’s what we need a little bit more of.” On “Meet the Press” on Sunday, he offered to pay the legal fees of a white supporter who sucker-punched a black demonstrator and later threatened to kill him — an offer that Trump soon denied making but that was televised around the country (For links to these incidents and others, go here).

No presidential candidate since the dark days of George Wallace has so routinely used the threat of mob violence as Trump. There is something absurd about conservatives dedicated to the rule of law advocating a vote for such a lawless candidate. A Trump White House likely would make Nixon’s White House look law-abiding by comparison. Trump has no tolerance for criticism and uses all the power at his disposal — whether inciting thugs or filing lawsuits – to shut it down. He even sued a journalist for putting his net worth lower than he would like people to believe.

Imagine how Trump would act with the full powers of the presidency. He’s already talked about shredding the First Amendment by amending the libel laws to make it easy for him to sue anyone who writes “negative” articles about him. It is hardly far-fetched to imagine a President Trump using the FBI, IRS, NSA, and other federal agencies to monitor and harass critics.

And that is hardly the only threat that Trump poses to our civil liberties. He has proposed deporting 11 million illegal immigrants, something that would require a police-state roundup. He has also proposed banning all Muslims from entering the country, which would seem a prima facie violation of the Constitutional prohibition on discrimination on the basis of religion. If the courts were to block such immoral and unconstitutional proposals, it’s easy to imagine Trump trying to pack the judiciary with complaint stooges who would let him expand executive power as he wishes.

That is a high price to pay — an unacceptably high price — for the off-chance that he might appoint a Supreme Court justice more conservative than Merrick Garland.