Most readers in the United States known that our Federal government has three branches, each independent of the other two. The Executive is the branch of the President, the Legislative is the branch of the Congress, and the Judiciary is the branch of the Supreme Court, as well as the “next level down” of District judges.
Visitors to the President’s House Site in Philadelphia (photograph by Matt Rourke for Associated Press)
Yesterday saw an example of what happens when one branch disagrees with another. On the Executive side, President Donald Trump issued an executive order to restore “truth and sanity to American history” as it is exhibited at museums, parks, and landmarks. More specifically, it involved an exhibit in Philadelphia prepared by the National Park Service. According to an Al Jazeera news article, the exhibit showed “nine people who were enslaved by former President George Washington at a historical site.”
In the immortal words of Bullwinkle Moose, this was the sort of thing that got Trump’s dandruff up. As the article put it, he “directed the Interior Department to ensure the sites do not display elements that ‘inappropriately disparage Americans past or living’.” Fortunately, the Judiciary exercised its independence from the Executive. At this point, it is more than worthwhile to cite the Al Jazeera text at greater length:
US District Judge Cynthia Rufe ruled that all materials must be restored in their original condition while the lawsuit challenging the removal’s legality plays out. She prohibited Trump officials from installing replacements that explain the history differently.
In her scathing 40-page decision, Rufe accused the federal government of trying to erase US history, much like the fictional authoritarian regime that ruled George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984.
“As if the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s 1984 now existed, with its motto ‘Ignorance is Strength,’ this Court is now asked to determine whether the federal government has the power it claims – to dissemble and disassemble historical truths when it has some domain over historical facts,” Rufe wrote. “It does not.”
Rufe had warned Trump administration lawyers during a hearing in January that they were making “dangerous” and “horrifying” statements when they said government officials could choose which parts of US history to display at NPS sites.
As of now, it is unclear what will happen next, since, according to the article, there was “no immediate comment from the Trump administration.”
I have to confess that, when I was studying American History in high school, the classes devoted to the Constitution were the ones I enjoyed the most. (It helped that my teacher had a similar enthusiasm.) In that context, I find it hard to avoid cringing whenever I listen to of news clip of Trump and wonder whether he would have been better off continuing his career in television entertainment! Come to think of it, could it be that he sees his current role as just another phase in such entertainment?
No comments:
Post a Comment