Posted on 10/05/2020 10:06:57 AM PDT by Kaslin
The political drama in Michigan reveals how essential it is in a republic that the citizens defy unconstitutional and illegal orders of their government.
The news broke late on Oct. 2 that the Michigan Supreme Court had invalidated Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s authority to issue executive orders related to Covid-19 after April 30. This was a victory for the rule of law, for the separation of powers, and for the liberties of the American people (okay, maybe just the people of Michigan).
Whitmer had declared a state of emergency on March 10 and extended it through a series of executive orders, on April 1, on April 30, and afterward. She claimed authority for these actions under the Michigan Constitution and two specific laws: the Emergency Powers of the Governor Act of 1945 and the Emergency Management Act of 1976.
The problem for Whitmer was that the 1976 law required the state legislature’s approval to extend a state of emergency beyond 28 days, which Republicans in the legislature refused to do. Whitmer’s response? Reinterpret the older law to give herself the power to extend the state of emergency unilaterally.
The draconian lockdowns she imposed on Michigan led to protests that attracted national attention in May. These protests were peaceful, although some protestors were armed. But the national media and Democrats in Michigan criticized the protestors as violent right-wing extremists.
The protests drew criticism because the protestors went mask-less and failed to observe social distancing. How selfish of them, and didn’t they care about grandma’s health?
Some critics went further and made religious arguments against the protests, asserting that Romans 13 requires Christians to respect and obey the governing authorities. On this interpretation, the Christians who protested Whitmer’s lockdown orders were actually disobeying God.
The critics were wrong, as the Michigan Court decision shows, but their mistake was more fundamental: Is the application of Romans 13 as straightforward in a republic as it was in the Roman Empire?
The Romans 13 argument for unlimited submission to civil magistrates runs into two chief difficulties. First, American constitutionalism sets limits on the authority of our civil magistrates. Second, the separation of powers and federalism creates situations in which magistrates will disagree, and well-intentioned Christians may rightly choose to obey one rather than the other. The decision of the Michigan Supreme Court illustrates the reality of both difficulties.
In the Apostle Paul’s epistle to the Romans, Chapter 13, he writes: “Let every soul be subject under the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.”
The literalist application of this text requires total obedience to the ruling authorities. This was how American loyalists read the text in the 1760s and 1770s. For them, the obvious duty of the Christian was obedience to the British government, and any effort towards revolution was disobedience.
But this woodenly literalistic interpretation runs into immediate difficulties: Does the Christian have a moral duty to submit to the magistrate under every circumstance? Does faithful Christian living require Christians to surrender their right to self-defense and to permit the agents of the government to kill them, even arbitrarily? This line of reasoning would justify any number of heinous acts, from Joseph Stalin’s purges (he was the governing magistrate, after all) to any murder committed by agents of the state.
The American theory of government recognizes this problem. Indeed, the patriots of 1775 and 1776 understood the challenge and met it. Their answer was clear. In a constitutional republic (or in 1775, a constitutional monarchy), the constitution is the highest law. The citizen’s duty is to obey all constitutional and legal orders.
Given the imperatives of Romans 13 and parallel biblical texts, Christians should be foremost in their obedience to the legal and constitutional commands of their government. But those very laws and constitutions exist to place clear limits on the powers of the government, and when the governors exceed their constitutional or legal authority, the citizens have no duty to obey them.
This was part of the American political order from the beginning, and this was what Calvin Coolidge meant as governor of Massachusetts when he explained that “Opinions and instructions do not outmatch the Constitution. Against it they are void. . . . Instructions are not given unless given constitutionally. Instructions are not carried out unless carried out constitutionally. There can be no constitutional instruction to do an unconstitutional act.”
In a constitutional republic, the Christian has a moral duty to obey all constitutional and legal commands. The Christian has no moral obligation to obey unconstitutional or illegal orders.
Another obstacle to the literalistic application of Romans 13 in America is the division of political authority. Well-intentioned Christians may call for their fellow believers to obey the civil magistrate, but they often evade the question of which magistrate to obey. A system of government that separates political power between three co-equal branches creates a confusing number of civil magistrates, each with legal authority that commands the obedience of the citizen.
In the case of Michigan, should the citizens of that state have obeyed the orders of their governor? Or should they have listened to the leadership of the state legislature? Michigan’s Constitution of 1963 gives pride of place to the legislative branch, just as the U.S. Constitution does. Don’t the people of a state owe greater allegiance to their representatives?
Or consider the problem of federalism: what happens when the president supports protests against lockdown orders? Faced with contradictory commands from equally legitimate magistrates, citizens must obey the Constitution as they understand it. Appeals to Romans 13 offer no guidance in such a case.
Court decisions, too, command the respect and obedience of the people. Now that the Michigan Supreme Court has spoken on the meaning of the 1945 and 1976 emergency powers laws, the people of Michigan know with some finality that their governor acted without legal authority in extending Michigan’s lockdown beyond April 30.
This Michigan drama demonstrates that American citizens must be willing to stand up for their rights. Courts cannot simply hand down decisions of their own accord. Michigan courts needed private citizens and businesses to challenge Whitmer’s orders before they could act. Citizens had to go first.
Some did so by offering free hair-cuts on the sidewalks of Lansing. Others pushed back by simply refusing to close their shops. These acts of defiance took courage, and they demonstrated that republicanism requires a spirited body of citizens who know their rights and are willing to defend them.
The real lesson of the Michigan high court’s decision is that it validates the behavior of Michiganders who have protested Whitmer’s actions since April 30. They were fighting for the Constitution and their constitutional rights.
They exercised the right to protest to oppose an illegal usurpation of powers by their governor. They followed the lead of the state legislature, deferred to the courts throughout the summer, and have at last found vindication in the state’s highest court. The protestors fought to preserve their republican form of government against paternalism and petty authoritarianism, exactly as all citizens in a free republic should.
Kinda gives “Just Say NO!” A whole new meaning.
the MSM calls us ‘Selfish’ etc for wanting to change their dictatorial mandates that are useless.
It went from ‘Flatten the Curve’ so that the hospitals aren’t overwhelmed to ‘Stop the Spread’ and that ain’t gonna happen ever.
They keep moving the goal post.
When Pence wonks out with numbers and statistics it won’t matter that they are getting better. Harris is slam any and all actions with ‘FAILURE’ and that’s all anyone will remember. Today they cited a Senior Citizen poll with Biden +30 saying it’s because Trump FAILED at handling Covid-19. Branding Works.
It sure does.
I’ve been referencing Acts 16. Paul was jailed but then the jailer discovered Paul was a Roman Citizen. Roman citizens were protected from incarceration without a trial. When he found out he told Paul he was free to go but Paul refused.
He told the jailer to go get the Magistrate who was to escort him out and apologize publicly.
A believer standing up for his rights under the law.
Has anyone ever seen this bitch and Bruce Jenner together?
Dumb. This abuse of powers will be used against her and she won’t win re-election.
Should send her seed packets - seeds that were forbidden to be sold under her COVID hysterical cannot buy mandate.
Well reasoned. Scripture does not give the magistrate absolute authority. Just legitimate authority. When they tell me I can’t provide for my family or I can’t worship in the assembly they are ordering me to sin and I should never obey that.
Some constraints are obeyable even if stupid or etc. I don’t have to agree with them. If they required I do a temperature screen before allowing a customer into my beauty shop I’d obey that. I’d they required that all people singing everywhere wear a mask I could obey that. If they require that anyone with covid symptoms be non invasively teared I could obey that.
I can’t obey a command to avoid the worship of God. And no, zoom doesn’t count.
Consider Daniel.
We are supposed to dare to be a Daniel. Yet we cower at home. With commendable exceptions thank God.
There needs to be lawsuits , legislation and supreme court decisions to enshrined permanently in July the petty dictator government can never ever do this again
Never ever ever should the government be able to with a whim say all you businesses are you schools everything needs to shut down
I also bring up Wurmbrand, Bonhoffer and Ten Boom.
Resist we much...
Didn’t she get elected because a pot-legalization question was on the ballot, so she got the stoner vote?
Well DUH! It's a lot harder to control people you don't like by starving them out if they are growing their own food!
See everyone thinks this governor was following Christian edict when in fact she was following Islimic sunnah. In Islime, one cannot ask questions of their mullah about their religion or face certain death. She, the governor, having a large population of mooslimes thought she could get away with this. Also the mooslime book called the Qurap, takes the words from the Torah and the Bew Testament and twists them in such a way that is favorable to Islime. So all she did was twist the words to make it favorable to her and then tell everyone they must surrender to her. Good thing the United States does not have stoning as a punishment. Women are stoned in islime more than males are. And if se were to go up against a judge in Iran she might be hanging from a light pole because she has a sharp tongue. But their so-called prophet visited hell and did say the majority of the dwellers were women. IF you think all of that is sexist, you are right, blame Islime for it because they are trying to bring it to the US and Michigan is just a rallying point.
Well how long do you think it takes to bring crops to the table; while you’re waiting?
Excellent news.
We’re supplementing store bought with home grown right now, something that The Wicked Witch of the North doesn’t cotton to...
But the absurdity of what she was denying people to buy; having areas of stores blocked off where you couldn’t buy stuff.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.