They still matter to some extent. Most people in the US have an expectation that the government will follow the law. We can use their lawless actions rhetorically to erode their political capital and empower the resistance movement.
But I agree with what I think your main point is—we can’t assume a court ruling against an action means it will stop anymore. I was listening to Bernie talk yesterday and even he didn’t seem to understand. He was talking about the court ordering a reversal to the spending freeze as a victory, apparently unaware that they are brazenly ignoring this restraining order.
They will not follow the law voluntarily, that much is true, but we can still rally around it and force them to, or at minimum make it costly to break.
They still matter to some extent. Most people in the US have an expectation that the government will follow the law. We can use their lawless actions rhetorically to erode their political capital and empower the resistance movement.
But I agree with what I think your main point is—we can’t assume a court ruling against an action means it will stop anymore. I was listening to Bernie talk yesterday and even he didn’t seem to understand. He was talking about the court ordering a reversal to the spending freeze as a victory, apparently unaware that they are brazenly ignoring this restraining order.
They will not follow the law voluntarily, that much is true, but we can still rally around it and force them to, or at minimum make it costly to break.
Possibly, but it’s important to make sure you also actually build a resistance movement, or this just amounts to speaking concerned words.
Very true. I need to up my own involvement in this as much as anyone.