Democrats broadly lack the spine necessary for this. But regardless, this is also illegal. Despite the actions of the current administration, an EO to snatch people off the street and jail them would violate the 4th amendment.
I’m not sure what system is being protected in the scenario where everyone is openly and illegally authoritarian. I hope that if Democrats get back into power they will invest in stabilizing democracy and the rule of law, not just attempting to run the same authoritarian playbook for their own benefit.
Nothing discussed is black-and-white illegal. SCOTUS has made that clear.
> hope that if Democrats get back into power they will invest in stabilizing democracy and the rule of law
Me too. The first step in that has to be setting the precedent that if you side with an autocrat, you lose your wealth and freedom.
You call the described actions "illegal", but under the law of the land as it stands today, nothing the President does is illegal if he can make even a vague claim to be doing it as an official act of the Office of President.
To be clear, this is wrong, terrifying, and needs to be overturned, but it is the law of the land, since the SCOTUS decision that made it so.
Assuming we can get to a place where Democrats hold power in our government once again, until we can get the absolute mess that the Republicans have made cleaned up in its entirety, it would be not merely irresponsible, but catastrophic for the Democrats to fail to use every tool at their disposal, including things that are only legal because the Republicans thought they would never have to give up power, in order to achieve that end.
The alternative is to fall back into fascism, which should be seen as unacceptable by absolutely anyone with a conscience.
Other countries do this _all the time_. Ireland had amended its constitution more times in a century than the US has in 250 years (and even then, the US ones are pretty front loaded). France is on its fifth republic.
Too many states are too heavily gerrymandered to disenfranchise minorities and other likely-Democratic voters for a Constitutional amendment that favors (small-d) democratic rule to pass. Same problem with a new Constitution.
To the sentiment more broadly, I tend to agree: we have given our original Constitution too much deference. It is flexible, yes, but not flexible enough to deal with all the changes that have arisen since, with one of the biggest problems being the much more rapid pace of life today. As for what specific measures are needed to fix it.....god, I don't know. I can come up with a few, but I don't for a second think they'd be comprehensive enough to prevent what happened over the past 40ish years to lead to this.
The party elites are complacent. That’s creating a political vacuum for someone who’s more aggressive.
> this is also illegal
An EO is. The President asking the FBI, DoJ and state AGs to prioritise the last administration’s lawbreakers—a thing Biden was elected to do and failed at—is just norms and conventions.
I am not expecting the Democrats, at least as they are now, to pursue justice regarding the schemers and criminals in this administration. They are far more interested in preserving power structures and the tiered justice system than even the easy political win inherent in holding their enemies to account. Expect the rhetoric to rapidly shift to "moving forward" and "Trump was an exception, other Republicans are totally reasonable coworkers."