Post-Constitutional America

Governor Greg Abbott of Texas laments the prospect of living in a “post-Constitutional” America.  And well he should.  So do we all.  It hasn’t happened yet, of course, but he fears that he will be compelled to bring it on.  How is that possible, one might ask.  Because the Supreme Court might decree that he must submit to the Constitution by deferring to the Federal Government’s Constitutional authority to make, monitor, and enforce immigration law and US border security
            OK, so what’s the problem, Governor?  Well, he doesn’t want to.  Or, more suavely, he believes that the Federal Government is not doing the job, and that he is responsible to secure the borders of Texas.  Therefore, as Chief Executive of the Sovereign State of Texas, it is his duty to defy the U.S. Constitution, its courts, its Executive and Legislative branches, and on his own say-so—after due deliberation, no doubt—to retract his oath “to support this constitution [as] the supreme law of the land.”  (That’s in Article VI, if you’re counting.)
            Well, let’s leave it to the legal gurus what other course he might choose to accomplish the goal of keeping those people out of Texas.  As a citizen of this country, I endorse the right—and applaud its exercise—to disobey any law one finds to be morally repugnant.  Civil disobedience has long, heroic history in this country.  This writer grew up during what has narrowly been called the Civil Rights Era of the fifties and sixties.  (“Narrowly,” because the entire history of the United States of America, from at least 1776 until it ends, is the Civil Rights Era—of world history.)
            Two features distinguish civil disobedience from mere lawlessness or rebellion.  The first is that it remains civil—that is, a) not criminal and b) not violent, which would of course be criminal.  The second is that the disobedient one willingly submits to the course of law; that is, is willing to sit in jail for defying the law.  Even the Birmingham Jail, where you can find the time to write letters explaining your defiance.  So, if Governor Abbott is willing to don the mantle of Martin Luther King, I say, “Bravo, Gov!  My hat’s off to you.”
            But that, of course, would keep us still in Constitutional America.  What, essentially, does “post-Constitutional America” mean?  It means this: The People are no longer the fount of political authority.  That spring will have run dry.  Somebody else will be in charge, and no one else will have anything to say about it.
            Our nation is first and foremost a political nation, created by political principles and documents and actions.  Our identity is and should be adherence or at least allegiance to those principles, documents, and acts.  The principles are that all humans are created politically equal, neither master nor servant; and, that all humans are fallible and corruptible.  We the People are the People of the United States of America.  The Founding Generation of People asserted the unheard-of proposition that WE have the right to form a government as we see fit.  That requires, of course, coming together to agree on what we see as fit, not to impose it.  It also requires that, as a unified Nation of People, we consent to abide by majority rule.  We certainly may continue to disagree and to try to persuade others to our positions.  But neither the majority nor the minority nor any individual can act to deprive any of the People of their civic and political rights or their inherent rights to self-agency within the legitimate operation of our governing framework.
            Governor Abbott, and apparently several other Governors of his Party, can assert their chagrin at Congressional failure to address the problem with meaningful legislation.  But that red-faced chagrin pales considerably when held up next to calls to certain Members of Congress to block current, reportedly fruitful, negotiations towards that end—in the name of preserving a “winning” issue for an election ten months hence.  The People collectively constitute the seat of political authority in this Constitutional Republic, not individual persons. The People’s representatives have the authorities to make laws, to enforce laws, and to resolve disputes based on the laws.  The States retain jurisdiction with respect to many matters.  No individual of any State, not even a Chief Executive, has any authority to ACT on an assertion that, since Congress is not doing its job, we will withdraw from the Union.  The last time that happened, 700,000 were slaughtered over four years.  And that was before the invention and industrial-scale distribution of AK-47s and AR-15s.