Where is Idaho’s delegation as Musk and Trump threaten to bypass the Constitution? | Opinion

It’s time to hold our congressional delegation accountable. All four of them, Sens. Jim Risch and Mike Crapo, and Reps. Mike Simpson and Russ Fulcher must stand up to Elon Musk and anyone who attempts to destroy the checks and balances so intently written in the United States Constitution to assure that no one branch of government overwhelms the others. Musk seems to think that his overarching efforts across the federal government cannot be checked by anyone, not even a federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump in his first term.

No matter where these four legislators elected by the people of Idaho travel in our state, the question is a simple one: “Do you support the rule of law by recognizing and affirming the role of our courts as a separate but equal branch of government with the authority to rule on the actions of the executive branch when lawsuits come before them?”

Federal judges around the country are granting temporary injunctions to Trump’s executive orders. The federal judge, Carl Nichols, who ordered a temporary block to Trump’s plan to put 2,200 employees on leave, was appointed by Trump during his last term. Judge Nichols also agreed to block an order that would have given just 30 days for the thousands of overseas USAID workers to move their families back to the states at the government’s expense. The administration wanted to place the workers on abrupt administrative leave.

Some will rightly point out that the judicial branch of government has no army or navy to enforce its decisions. And federal marshals and Department of Justice personnel are under the executive branch. Thus, it is the consent of the other two branches of government that must prevail in respecting the role of the courts in interpreting and deciding the law. That’s the way It’s been since the founding of the republic, and it must not change because a billionaire is now calling the shots for the American president.

And in this fight between the executive and judicial branches, it is notable that Congress is surprisingly silent, at least Republicans, who live in dreadful fear of Musk depositing a load of money in the campaign coffers of an opponent in the next election. They also know that what Musk is peddling in America is finding support among MAGA voters who they dare not offend. Yet, the razor-thin Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress block Republicans from producing the majority it takes to pass the radical Project 2025 legislation of the Heritage Foundation. So Trump sidesteps Congress with his executive orders.

It is Congressional authority that is at the heart of this constitutional crisis. Judges respond to Trump’s criticism of their rulings by pointing out that there is a mechanism, through Congress, to cut spending, to end USAID, to change employment protections for federal employees. Each of these was enacted by Congress so Congress can make the changes to reduce funding and staffing.

That only works if Trump agrees to the set of norms that has governed relationships among the three branches throughout our history. If, instead, his intent with these executive orders is nothing more than a trial run to see if he can establish a true dictatorship where there is little or no need for a Congress elected by the people, the democratic machinery of our federal government comes to a screeching halt. If that doesn’t send chills down the spines of our Idaho’s congressional delegation, then they have forgotten their oath of office that requires them to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic...”

Musk pays no heed to our Constitution, and rumors abound in Washington that he will convince Trump to ignore judicial decisions. It must not be lost on the American people that this is not the work an American politician accountable to the people. It’s the work of a South African billionaire who has migrated to our shores with his white nationalist credo intact.

Musk’s campaign to stand in for elected representatives has landed across the Atlantic as well. He attacked the duly elected government of Great Britain, claiming the Prime Minister should be imprisoned. In Germany, he endorsed the far-right party, Alternative for Germany, trying to influence the outcome of Germany’s upcoming election on Feb. 23. Who knows where he goes next, but it will be to distinguish the flames of representative government in favor of strongman rule

For 18 years, I stood before students teaching American government and its system of checks and balances which prevent any one branch of government from gaining singular control over our federal government. Never in moments of despair when I thought the wrong candidate won an election did I ever think it possible that the foundation of our republic embodied in the United States Constitution would crumble before my eyes.

This is no time to regard Trump 2.0 as just a stronger and more bitter version of his last term. No, this time he seems focused on taking down the United States Constitution on which state constitutions are based in all 50 states. If he succeeds, it is not just a federal government that dissolves before our very eyes, the 50 states will follow suit, especially those governed by Trump allies. Musk already vows to use his billions in Republican primaries to guarantee that only those farthest to the right win office. He may start with Republican primaries that determine who wins congressional seats, but he will not stop there. Idaho’s flirtation with dark money in the past will be a full-on love affair with extremists if Musk prevails at the federal level.

There appears only one way to reverse this most radical and hostile takeover of government by Musk and Trump. It must be our elected representatives in the halls of Congress who step up and caution against ignoring the rule of law as practiced by federal judges who are following and enforcing the law.

As I write this column, we do not know how this turns out. Does Trump respond to judicial decisions with the customary appeals process, a perfectly acceptable way of differing with a judicial mandate or does he simply ignore the courts and plow over the fertile ground of American democracy?

Anywhere our two senators and two congressmen travel in Idaho, there must be voters and reporters willing to stand up and ask that simple question:

Do you support the rule of law by recognizing and affirming the role of our courts as a separate but equal branch of government with the authority to rule on the actions of the executive branch when lawsuits come before them?

There is only one correct answer that defends and affirms the Constitution of the United States, and it is not subject to congressional equivocating in avoidance of the truth. A simple yes or no will do.