Let’s talk about Vice President JD Vance’s weekend comments that stirred up quite the conversation about democracy, checks and balances, and the role of judges. Spoiler alert: it didn’t go over too well with everyone.
The Comment That Sparked It All
On Sunday, Vance posted on X (formerly Twitter) questioning the authority of judges over executive power. He compared a judge directing military operations or commanding the attorney general to “illegal” acts, concluding:
“Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”
This came after a federal judge temporarily blocked Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing Treasury Department payment systems. The judge cited concerns about potential “irreparable harm” if emergency relief wasn’t provided.
While Musk and some others cheered Vance’s stance, the backlash was swift and fierce, with critics accusing him of misunderstanding a cornerstone of democracy.
The Critics Fire Back
New York Rep. Daniel Goldman wasn’t shy about pointing out the issue, tweeting:
“It’s called the ‘rule of law,’ @jdvance. Our Constitution created three co-equal branches of government to provide checks and balances on each other (‘separation of powers’). The judiciary makes sure that the executive follows the law. If you do, then you won’t have problems.”
Another user jumped in with a sharp retort:
“JD Vance, a Yale-educated lawyer and sitting VP, claims judges can’t check executive power. That’s literally their job. Courts overturned Nixon, Bush, and Trump. If judges couldn’t rule on executive actions, presidents would be kings.”
David Hogg, DNC vice chair, added his take:
“Read the Constitution.”
The Musk Connection
Meanwhile, Musk wasn’t exactly sitting quietly. After U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer’s ruling, Musk took to X, calling the judge “corrupt” and demanding his impeachment. He even suggested a bold new system: firing the “worst 1% of appointed judges” every year based on evaluations by elected bodies.
“A corrupt judge protecting corruption. He needs to be impeached NOW!” Musk wrote.
A Bigger Picture
This isn’t just a social media squabble. The debate highlights the delicate balance of power between branches of government. Critics argue that undermining judicial oversight erodes democracy, while supporters like Vance and Musk see such rulings as unnecessary interference.
The uproar raises some serious questions: Where do we draw the line between legitimate checks on power and overreach? And in a democracy built on shared authority, how do we ensure no branch wields too much?
