I’ll call this the “Humpty Dumpty” edition, because between that debate and recent Supreme Court decisions, democracy has fallen off the wall, and the big question is, “Can we put it back together again?”
Folks, I’m here to be your ray of hope. Sort of. Let’s grab the glue and get to it.
You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Anita Chabria and David Lauter bring insights into legislation, politics and policy from California and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
The king can do no wrong
You’ve heard by now that the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Trump in his immunity case. How bad can that really be?
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who has come out punching like the new RBG, wrote the main dissent, and holy moly, is that woman freaked out. There’s not a whole lot more I can add that she didn’t say:
“A President’s use of any official power for any purpose, even the most corrupt, is immune from prosecution. That is just as bad as it sounds,” she wrote.
Then, “In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.”
But wait, there’s more:
“Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the Presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law.”
Ash Bhagwat, a professor and expert in constitutional law at UC Davis, told me none of that was an exaggeration. The office of president is now weaponized for personal use — as long as the president can claim some sort of official connection.
He brought up Trump’s famous line: “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, OK?”
“After this decision, if he did it, he’d be in trouble,” Bhagwat said. “But if he ordered the Army to do it, he’s immune.”
The king can do no wrong: Part II
And if you aren’t scared enough, let me bring up another Supreme Court decision last week: Chevron vs. Natural Resources Defense Council.
For 40 years, the legal precedent has largely given power to federal agencies to determine how best to regulate industries that don’t like to be regulated but that Congress has ordered be watched.
The Supreme Court overturned that precedent and said if Congress didn’t spell out every itty-bitty detail on something like, say, what constitutes polluting our water supply, then the agency in question can’t decide for itself.
Basically, it guts federal regulation — all of it, across the board — by making it subject to court interpretation. This has long been a dream of ultra-conservatives and goes hand-in-hand with Trump/Project 2025 threats to fire civil servants if elected.
So little things like how Medicare and Medicaid health plans are administered, how clean air and water rules are implemented and how tobacco sales are regulated are all up for grabs. If any industry doesn’t like it, it need only find a like-minded judge.
A president who can do whatever he wants and new power for corporations to do whatever they want. What could go wrong?
Bhagwat told me he’s less worried about it than I am, because courts can be pretty good at figuring these things out.
But he’s got a bigger worry. Over the past decade, he said, there have been a series of rulings giving the executive office greater power over the federal bureaucracy.
Combine that increase in power with today’s immunity ruling — and top it off with the purge of civil servants Trump has promised if elected, the last line of defense of anyone willing to argue with him — and we are a democracy in name only.
The national nervous breakdown
Which brings us to the debate, also known as the national nervous breakdown. It wasn’t just hard to watch Biden stumble and fumble — it hurt our collective, democracy-loving psyche. If we can’t have clean water, can we at least replace the fluoride with Prozac?
Rightfully, Biden’s disturbing performance has led to endless calls for him to step aside and let another candidate take over. The somewhat hilarious part of that is that Vice President Kamala Harris’ name is, for most people, about fifth on the list of possible replacements, even though obviously she would be next in line and is polling the same or better than any other. More on that below.
Still, there are about 30 billion articles speculating on who a replacement would be: Michelle Obama, Gavin Newsom, Pete Buttigieg, Gretchen Whitmer.
Weekend at Biden’s
But I’m here to tell you, folks: Joe ain’t leaving. Of course, I am often wrong and may be again. But there are a couple of hard facts that point to him remaining the candidate.
First: He said so. Even Trump gets that.
“If he doesn’t want to get out, there’s not a thing they can do about it,” Trump said.
Second: Nobody else is polling better.
Third: Joe still has the same shot at winning as he did before the debate debacle.
This is where you’re all shaking your heads and thinking I’m an idiot. I am not claiming otherwise, but let me ask you this: If you had to vote today, who would you vote for?
The truth is — just like Trump’s base — the Democratic base is hardened. We know Joe is too old. We know he’s not at his best. We wish he had stepped aside sooner. But it’s not like a Biden voter is suddenly going all Trump, or even deciding to throw away their vote on a worm-brained Robert Kennedy Jr.
Bhagwat, the professor, told me, “I am with that very large number of Americans who think having a president who is 86 when he leaves office is problematic.”
But when I asked him if he’s still voting Biden?
“Well sure,” he said. “Of course.”
The king-maker ruling only solidifies sane people’s resolve to vote for democracy at all costs.
So we are left exactly where we were before the debate: with a handful of low-information voters (that doesn’t mean dumb, it’s politico-speak for not paying attention) in swing states deciding the whole shebang. Those voters will get snippets of news from TikTok and Instagram but likely won’t make any real decision for months.
And that’s a long time away.
The Democratic Party, when it’s done with its very understandable but also pointless freak-out, will have time to focus voters on what King Donald I would do.
Which is what Biden tried to do with his brief but coherent remarks Monday. No, he didn’t blow us away. But he made sense. Improvement.
He started with a warning that this ruling sets “a dangerous precedent.” He ended with “May God help preserve our democracy.”
Y’all, in this example, God is your second cousin Eddy in Detroit.
No, I don’t love Biden as a candidate. I respect the service he’s given to this country, and his presidency has done a lot of good. But if I have to vote for Doddering Joe to protect a country I love, so be it.
He is the last of the old guys. If we can preserve this place until 2028, I promise you will have all the young candidates you could hope for.
In the meantime, the guy may have hubris, but he also has integrity. Such are our times.
So that is my slim ray of hope for you: Democracy still has a chance, in the form of an old man with good days and bad.
The must-read: Justice Sotomayor dissent: ‘The President is now a king above the law’
The victory for line-ditchers: Loopholes kill California plan to restrict CLEAR at airports
The L.A. Times Special: Newsom and Democratic lawmakers announce ballot measure to rival more conservative crime reform
Stay Golden,
Anita Chabria
P.S. It’s true she faces racism. It’s true she faces misogyny. But there is also something about Kamala Harris that is just uncomfortable. Witness: this BET Awards bit.
Illustration of Kamala Harris.
(Michelle Rohn / For The Times)
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.