Generally defined as a problem or controversy that cannot be resolved by the Constitution, we in the good ol’ U.S. of A. have had our share of constitutional crises. These events involve one political force or another tugging on our Constitution to find a weak point for its own advantage.

Opinion

We have historically tackled these crises in one of four ways. Either the elected branches of our government have compromised, the judicial branch has arbitrated by decision, we have amended our Constitution, or, as in the case of Civil War, we resolved the crisis through force of arms and bloodshed. Lots of bloodshed.

The first of these kerfuffles occurred in 1803 over a question of federal appointments. The Constitution was silent on the issue, so Chief Justice John Marshall, in Marbury v. Madison, decided the issue, and established the precedent of Supreme Court primacy over constitutional interpretation, and gave the judiciary branch its cojones.

This precedent affirmed the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government in our republic, arbiters of the Constitution and not merely clerks.

The Judiciary Act of 1793, signed by President George Washington, fleshed out the judicial branch by establishing a system of lower courts to adjudicate legal questions around the country. Both Marshall’s Marbury decision and the Judiciary Act have often raised hackles on Congress and the White House in subsequent years.

This tug-of-war over power among the branches of our government prevails to this day and embodies the dynamic tension that I think our Founders, in their wisdom, had firmly in their minds.

Throughout our history, we Americans have stumbled occasionally on what the Constitution says and means, and how we should behave as citizens under it. From time to time, the document has not been crystal clear on this point or that point about some controversy, but we have always found our way by its light.

When the Constitution’s letter has been ambiguous, we have survived as a nation by relying upon its spirit. The elegant wisdom in our system is that the three branches of government serve as checks and balances on one another. Thus, no single branch of government can make too much of a mess of things without another branch jerking the reins back, and returning it to our constitutional roots.

During every constitutional crisis in our history, I’ll bet a dollar to a donut that savvy citizens have said, “This is the worst one yet.” And history replies, “Hold my beer!”

From the aforementioned events through President Andrew Jackson’s forced relocation of Native Americans from the southern states and the “Nullification” controversy, the succession of John Tyler to the presidency, the question of newly-admitted states being free soil or slave, the Civil War, the civil rights movement and up to Watergate, the United States has weathered every constitutional crisis we have faced.

Our Constitution has survived every attack upon it mounted by political excess. When needed, we have amended it to fit new circumstances,  thereby proving that it is a living document.

It is with this in mind that I applaud members of the Wyoming Bar Association for their recent letter to the Wyoming congressional delegation that warns of a new political attack on our Constitution and challenges the delegation to rise to the defense of the rule of law.

When the executive branch, aided and abetted by a silent, impotent Congress, threatens federal judges with impeachment for purely political reasons, our system of checks and balances is under attack. If the attack succeeds, the slippery slope down toward despotism is greased. Without the protections of the rule of law, we are no longer citizens of a republic, but serfs to a tyrannical system.

If we, as citizens, are sick and tired of a pesky judiciary monkeying around in our lives, we can simply amend our Constitution and repeal Article III, placing our future squarely in the hands of the executive branch. But that decision is up to us, not the president.

So once again, thank you Wyoming Bar Association for planting your feet and standing your ground for the rule of law. Here endeth the lesson.

Columnist Rod Miller is a Wyoming native, raised on his family's cattle ranch in Carbon County. He graduated from Rawlins High School, home of the mighty Outlaws, where he was named Outstanding Wrestler...

Join the Conversation

30 Comments

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Newt Gingrich testified this week concerning judicial overreach stating that “it is clearly a potential Constitutional crisis involving the Judicial branch’s efforts to fully override the Legislative and Executive branches” when 15 District Judges effectively seized control of various Executive branch duties during the first six weeks of Trump’s term via nation-wide injunctions. “This is potentially a Judicial coup d’etat that clearly violates the Constitution and more than 200 years of American history.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXd_gGHfZJc

    Representative John Kennedy also outlined how nation-wide universal injunctions,
    1) lack any Constitutional basis within Article III
    2) lack any SCOTUS rulings to provide basis
    3) lack any Statutory basis
    4) lack any historical common law basis.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmBDTA733PM

    We’ve all watched in horror since 2016 as our once esteemed Judicial system and rule of law has been systematically pretzelized beyond recognition by keen lawyers using every angle they can connive to attack and stop Trump’s MAGA/MAHA agenda. Universal injunctions are just one of the tricks. Agreed, judges shouldn’t be physically attacked. But that doesn’t mean that the Executive / Legislative branches can’t defend themselves from rogue Judicial members. Lots of options are available to deal with this mess outside of amending our Constitution, all legal and fairly straight forward.

    We have looming sovereign debt defaults, Trump’s rebalancing of global trade, reestablishing the health of our nation and so many other major issues. Concurrently, the leg of our government has gangrene with its $37T debt. It’s gonna hurt, but the leg has to go to save the body. Major cuts in spending have to be made, or we’re toast. As such, the lawfare and rogue judges have to be pulled back so that what must be done can be done with the least amount of pain possible.

  2. From the letters I have written and responses received our representatives are more afraid of trump then the people of Wyoming. Look how trump has turned on Mitch McConnell? Remember when every photo of Mitch McConnell had Barrasso next to or behind him? Barrasso has sold his soul.

  3. The attack upon our judges is absolutely wrong. I see that Hageman and Barrasso have chimed in to support the attack. Not a surprise since they march to the MAGA dummers. I was heartened by the action taken by our bar association. Even in ruby red Wyoming, there are still people with sense.

    At a townhall meeting in Greybull last week, our state senator (who lives in the infamous gun and glee club county) met with a bipartisan crowd of about forty that he later described as “hostile.” I was unable to attend, but have been assured they were not hostile. He was extremely proud of his list of legislative bills. They had questions which he could not answer; half the bills he had difficulty explaining. He did not receive the atta boy response he was expecting.

    I attended his townhall in Lovell the night before – seven people were there, including two from our local newspapers. He was busting with pride over the bills, but was unprepared with adequate explanations then. He was asked questions, but with only seven of us, he wasn’t pressed too hard.

    Your columns are of great help in these trying times. But, as you point out, this nation has experienced many trying times.

  4. For all the yapping by the Democrats, and the Leftist and Liberal media about a ‘constitutional crisis’ created by ‘orange man bad;’ not one word was said about the coverup of Biden’s cognitive decline making him unfit for office. As bad as Harris would have been as president, she and the cabinet should have invoked the 25th Amendment. But with the uniparty, the country comes second as the party is more important.

    1. Let’s see here….there was once a very popular president that was suffering g from dementia, that was officially announced after he left office. Was that in the same ballpark as President Biden? Yelping about Biden at this point is pure unadulterated “whataboutism” that you are using for distraction. Focus needs to be squarely on Trump and his tyrannical attempts to avoid complying with courts.

      1. LOL, Robert. Whataboutism is what R vs. D kayfabe political theater has as its core principal. That and projection make up 90% of partisan rhetoric in this dog and pony show.

    2. Why would Biden be brought up? He’s gone and in the political world he’s ancient history. Remember Reagan? By the way, even with his issues he was much better than Dumpy. I know, I know- what about Hillary.

    3. No comments are taken seriously from Republicans who could not bring themselves to deliver a guilty verdict of the man who caused a violent attack on our Capitol on January 6. In other words, stuff your nonsense.

  5. Thanks, Rod. As a poet and historian, I’m reminded many great empires have declined through complacent citizenry being covertly distracted by bread and circus. The law of entropy has shown, out of some that were authoritarian, arose democracies and those that were democracies begat dictatorships. Historically, I’m inclined to think we are headed for the latter, unless poetically we :
    Remember, Rise and Resist.

  6. Thank you Rod, for your excellent sentence: “The elegant wisdom in our system is that the three branches of government serve as checks and balances on one another.” If only. Unfortunately, we’re not witnessing this elegant balance, at home or on a national level. During this last Wyoming legislative session, most elected legislators, influenced by a financial bovine-like ring in their nose, followed out-of-state directives of the east coast based Freedom Caucus. The Wyoming members of Congress hew even closer to the elitist, “we’re better than you ‘hysterical’ people,” and show little allegiance to adhering to the Founders wisdom of co-equal branches. In fact, Congress is more powerful than the Executive Branch as it has the power to impeach a president and withhold funding, a serious jerk on the reins. So, again, I ask Senators Barasso, Lummis and Representative Hageman, to Cowboy Up and fulfill the duty they swore to defend and uphold – following the constitution. Just mirror the example provided by the good judges of Wyoming and speak up for the third branch of government.

  7. I agree with Rod here. Yes, Wyoming is “ sheep” country for many years, but in this instance, Wyoming citizens need to grow some spine. What current administration is doing to our judicial system is very dangerous. Resist!

  8. I have been having similar thoughts and concerns. The firing of prosecutors for doing their job, which happened to involve cases related to the president, threatening impeachment to judges who decide against the administration, and now talk of a 3rd term all point to an executive on the path to despotism.

  9. Thank goodness that the Judicial Branch manages to rein in the Legislative and Executive Branches. Those last two often collaborate far too often, rather than serving as true checks to each other. When you have a mostly spineless Legislative branch, who refuses to temper the Executive, as we have today, it gets scary.

  10. I’ll add kudos to the law offices who are suing the administration over the EOs forbidding their employees access to the courthouses. We all need to stand staunchly behind the rule of law which is the heart of our constitution.

  11. It’s quite ironic and almost entertaining to watch the left wring their hands and cry now about “the Constitution”. Something that was used for toilet paper through the COVID nightmare and many other aspects of the Biden administration.

    The programming of the American populace seems unbreakable, the left/right Red vs. Blue strategy has been a winner for the elite that control both Sides of the Aisle in Washington DC.
    Anyone able to step back and not partake in the charade can see how both sides are taking this nation to its grave.

    1. Both sides DON’T do it.

      Only Trump defies court orders.
      Only Trump contests elections with the use of violence and lies.
      Only Trump sends innocent people to El Salvadorian prisons in defiance of court orders and the due process of law.
      Only Trump illegally fires civil servants.
      Only Trump openly bribes a state AG with a campaign contribution to shut down judicial action against his BS university and then rewards her by making her the US AG. (Yes Pam Bondi — we know you are corrupt).

      Only Trump talks about an unconstitutional 3rd term.

      And one last word about Covid. We had the highest death rate from Covid of any western country. Why? Because Trump told us to drink bleach.

      But you keep hanging in their. Liberation Day is here.

  12. Miller’s column is worthy of our Congressional delegation’s attention and, more importantly, for them to advocate for the rule of law and not hide under the shroud of Trump’s frontal assault on the Constitution and the principles that fall within it. Lummis and Hageman, as lawyers, should certainly understand judiciary’s role in preserving the balance of powers and guarding against the dangers of executive overreach. While Barrasso does not have the legal training the other two have, as a doctor he took an oath to “do no harm” and, in this case, our democracy is the “patient” which he must protect and not allow Trump to kill it by a thousand cuts.