Locked and Loaded
Sometimes in society, as Locke notes, there are times when problems arise that cannot wait for laws to be passed. The legislative branch is slow and the law making process takes a long time. In the state level alone there are 27 steps to getting a bill passed. This is the time when it is important for the executive branch to exercise 'good judgement'. While that is a concept that could be reviewed for years by the judicial branch it, is eloquently stated and just vague enough to allow the executive branch to acquire powers that were unseen by the founders. Normally it is the fog of war that allows the executive branch to get extra power and the panic that is caused by time sensitive situations. As I sit here watching my cats attack each other, I can't help but wonder if I could calmly explain to them that ears don't go in mouths and tails are a part of your own bodies, if they would stop and shake paws. Likely enough though, I will have to drop this laptop and pull them apart at least ten times in the last paragraph. This is enough to make the whole trajectory of a blog post go awry, imagine what it could do to a country. The preventative measures that are taken during a crisis are seen and presented as necessary by those exercising them, but it is crucial that no extra powers are taken. This is how we get unbalanced checks and balances and the interests of the public are swept aside. As Locke says this initiative is, "nothing but the power of doing public good without rule." Emergencies call for crisis but it's important we remember that these powers are being taken in the best interests of the cats, not to hinder and take powers away from them. I can do nothing about them having mouths and ears but hopefully I can pull them apart fast enough to avoid serious injury between the two of them.
I think that the prerogative of the judicial branch to take action in times of need is an important step in understanding the rights that individual citizens give up when joining Locke's commonwealth. Specifically, the government has the power to protect the property of each of its citizens,and in certain circumstances this may mean circumventing a legislative process that is bogged down by the individual agenda's of its members - one interesting thought that my group discussed today in class, is that there seems to be a bit of a contradiction between Locke's described needed for executive prerogative and the idea of majority rule (especially that each citizen within this majority will be a fully functioning, positive member of the commonwealth; baring of course they should remove themselves from its membership). If the majority is seen as a fully rational, cohesive unit then in what circumstances would the legislative body be bogged down by inaction and it necessary for the executive branch to maneuver around them?
ReplyDelete