Whatever happened to conservative constitutionalism?

There is a puddle where a serious-seeming body of thought used to be

There was once such a thing, in the United States and elsewhere, as constitutional conservatism.

This was a body of thought which provided an approach to thinking and acting about constitutional issues. It was a body of thought which, of course, would not be that shared by a liberal or a progressive, but it was a set of ideas and practices nonetheless. One could disagree with it, but it was there.

And now, it has gone.

It was dissolved into barely a puddle, like the wicked witch at the end of the film of the Wizard of Oz.

*

But not long ago, it was whole and (seemingly) formidable - again like a wicked witch.

It put forward arguments on States’ Rights.

It put forward arguments against the abuses of federal government.

It was aghast at situations like the Waco siege of 1993 where federal lethal power was used against individuals.

It took precedent seriously and also the settled caselaw of the courts.

It took individual rights seriously, including in respect of due process when challenging executive power.

It took Congress seriously, in setting the parameters in what presidents could and could not do, in economic policy and in directing military action.

As a reader of a liberal constitutionalist blog, you probably would have disagreed with some or all of this conservative constitutionalism.

Yet it existed for you to disagree with.

And now, it is a puddle.

A puddle where a serious body of thought used to exist.

*

We now instead have a president who wants to use and abuse lethal and coercive power to the hilt, regardless of Congressional oversight and States’ Rights. A president who wants to militarise the capital city.

A president who cannot get enough of “emergency” powers to rule by decree - for such “emergency” situations as placing tariffs on an island of penguins.

And Congress and the courts stand by, and even clap and cheer.

They could stop him, with the powers vested in them by the codified constitution of the United States.

*

For there are always Trumps - the difference is what the holders of the checks and balances do to prevent Trumps (and their allies) doing as they wish.

But all those earnest conservative articulations and expositions about how the constitution would prevent the abuse of power were for nothing.

All those stout defences of States Rights and the Bill of Rights were for nothing.

There is just now a puddle.