{"id":29109,"date":"2025-01-12T09:55:16","date_gmt":"2025-01-12T14:55:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/?p=29109"},"modified":"2025-01-08T14:27:21","modified_gmt":"2025-01-08T19:27:21","slug":"trumps-nominees-would-support-the-constitution-more-than-senators-have","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/freethepeople.org\/trumps-nominees-would-support-the-constitution-more-than-senators-have\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump’s Nominees Would Support the Constitution More than Senators Have"},"content":{"rendered":"

Senators should consent to nominees who would use their constitutional powers to limit governments.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Robert F. Kennedy, the nominee announced to head Health and Human Services, wrote three books<\/a> exposing harmful government actions on Covid.<\/p>\n

Pete Hegseth, the nominee announced to head Defense, has said<\/a> that \u201cany general that was involved, general, admiral, whatever, that was involved in any of the DEI, woke s–t has got to go.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lee Zeldin, the nominee announced to head the Environmental Protection Agency, voted against national environmental regulations 86% of the time<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In these important ways, these nominees have indicated that they would use their constitutional powers against others in governments and cronies to limit them<\/a>.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s how you support the Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Supporting Accidentally<\/strong><\/p>\n

Media and politicians typically just play to audiences.<\/p>\n

Media are running stories about whether Trump\u2019s announced nominees are moral and about whether they have tenures in bureaucracies that make them qualified<\/a>. Trump has been nominating people who are popular or whose money can buy popularity<\/a>. Swing senators are prepping to platform salacious storytelling<\/a> and to posture about their duty to advise and consent.<\/p>\n

Even so, despite these people\u2019s every inclination<\/a>, this time we might actually get something from them that\u2019s valuable, if we hold them to it. Or more likely, if we hold Trump to it, or if we hold ourselves to it.<\/p>\n

The key in governing seasons, like in election seasons, is to hold out for what we want—to never settle for less.<\/p>\n

Supporting by Limiting Others<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Constitution is designed to make our life, liberty, and property secure<\/a> by having government people limit<\/a> others in governments.<\/p>\n

Officials can be personally quite moral, and distressingly often this doesn\u2019t help us. Instead, superficially-good officials avoid conflicts<\/a> with their colleagues in governments. The only people we could reasonably count on to protect us, then, leave us unprotected. These officials\u2019 public actions are not<\/a> moral<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Officials can be experienced and impressive in managerial roles, and this won\u2019t help us, this will hurt us. An unconstitutional organization that\u2019s more efficient is more despotic<\/a>.<\/p>\n

What matters is whether an official will make our unalienable rights<\/a> secure<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s current nominees, to a far-greater extent than his first-term nominees, promise to take significant actions to constitutionally limit others.<\/p>\n

Starting as Well as They\u2019re Ready To<\/strong><\/p>\n

Even though in these qualifying rounds some things are looking up, we still can already see that things are not the best. Not one of the nominees has advocated executively closing<\/a> his fully or significantly unconstitutional organization<\/a>. Not one has even recommended repealing<\/a> his organization.<\/p>\n

As this long season starts, the best that initially could be on tap would be if Trump would strongly support each nominee the exact way we need him to, starting now and continuing all the way through on-the-record confirmation votes<\/a>:<\/p>\n