TÜRKİYE ORTA ASYA HABER KKUORDİNATÖRÜ

EPPC/ ETHIC & PUBLIC POLICY CENTER: WORLD TURKIC NEWS / IFJ - INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF JOURNALISTS Is Donald Trump Breaking the Law? Seven Experts Share Their Opinions. Free Press By Edward Whelan President Trump's first 90 days of his second term have been marked by a series of aggressive legal maneuvers. These include: pressure on law firms the president sees as "anti-Trump"; the threat to revoke Harvard's tax exemption; the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia and other green card holders on campus to El Salvador; and more. Regarding the alleged deportation of Venezuelan gang members, the Supreme Court on Saturday issued an order halting the administration's plans, writing: "The government is instructed not to remove any member of the class of detainees from the United States until further notice from this Court." Many critics argue that the administration's actions are pushing the limits of executive power. Others claim they are downright unconstitutional. The Trump White House and its defenders say it's a hysterical situation and that the president is simply using presidential powers granted to him since the Obama administration. For example, regarding the deportation of illegal immigrants, they say he's doing nothing more than restoring the rule of law, which the Biden administration disregarded. We decided to ask seven of the country's brightest legal experts—from across the political spectrum, including a Bush White House lawyer, a progressive constitutional lawyer, and a former federal judge—a simple question: Is the Trump administration acting unlawfully? How should we interpret Trump's legal strategy—if there is one at all? What is the most striking aspect of this moment? Is this the usual conflict between the courts and the executive branch? Or are we heading into uncharted waters? Given the ideological diversity of these participants, the consensus is striking and perhaps surprising. They all agree that the president's legal tactics reflect a dangerous willingness to disregard legal and constitutional constraints and need to be quickly reined in. Here's what they said: I support Trump's policy goals, but I oppose the politicization of law. By Ed Whelan For Donald Trump, it seems law is nothing more than politics. So it's no surprise he applies the same tactics he uses in political battles to the legal arena: Always be on the offensive. Never admit wrongdoing. Fuel grievances. Proclaim false victories. Spread conspiracy theories. Condemn treason. Criticize tyranny. Define liberals. Redefine reality. Sow chaos. Produce quick fixes. And so on. One of the primary methods Trump uses to implement this political vision is to make the Department of Justice an extension of the White House. The Attorney General has always been accountable to the president, but the Department of Justice has long enjoyed considerable daily operational autonomy. This division stems from a concern to avoid both the appearance and the reality that the White House's political interests are distorting the administration of justice. The Trump White House has no such concern. Rather, it wants it to be known that the Department of Justice is serving the White House's political interests. Therefore, the de facto attorney general, to whom the nominal attorney general Pam Bondi and other senior Department of Justice officials are accountable, appears to be Stephen Miller, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff, who is not a lawyer and whose sharp political skills include a tendency to shamelessly lie. The White House has also marginalized the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel. This office was long tasked with reviewing executive orders and proclamations proposed by a president for their legality. While the Office of Legal Counsel has a strong institutional bias in favor of executive power, its reluctance to approve Trump's executive orders has made it an undesirable institution. The unsurprising result is that many of Trump's executive orders and proclamations have serious legal flaws. As someone who supports many of Trump’s policy goals, I am concerned that the administration lacks a coherent legal strategy. The tendency to view law as politics will not help it win legal battles. And the perception of the judiciary as an enemy, increasingly, but excessively exaggeratedly, heralds a harsh conflict that will make things worse for all of us. Click here to continue reading. Edward Whelan is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Center for Ethics and Public Policy and holds the EPPC’s Antonin Scalia Chair in Constitutional Studies. He served in that capacity from March 2004 to January 2021, making him the longest-serving Chair in EPPC history.