CHURCH: Why A Governor’s Fiat Is Not A Constitutional ‘Republican Form Of Government’

REUTERS/Mike Segar/File Photo

Mike Church Host, The Mike Church Show
Font Size:

Today, dozens of state governors are acting as autocrats without the action of a single legislative body. This is a constitutional outrage that needs correcting. Fast.

There are now only 8 states remaining whose governors have not implemented draconian shutdowns of their states’ economies and social infrastructures i.e. churches and schools. Some cite Homeland Security Laws passed after 9-11 while others just act on their own fiat, but why isn’t anyone asking if any of these acts are constitutional?

While the Constitution was being debated for ratification in Pennsylvania, Tench Coxe wrote a pamphlet in support called “An Examination.” Citing Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution, Coxe stated,  “The United States guarantee to every state in the union a separate republican form of government. From thence it follows, that any man or body of men, however rich or powerful, who shall make an alteration in the form of government of any state, whereby the powers thereof shall be attempted to be taken out of the hands of the people at large, will stand guilty of high treason.” [emphasis mine-MC] Practically speaking, this is pretty much what dozens of state governors have done, without a single act from any legislative body.

Many readers will think these acts are necessary and therefore appropriate and legal, but has anyone bothered to actually research the issue? Does the U.S. Constitution have nothing to say about autocrats and quasi-martial laws that include incredibly dangerous assaults on religious liberty?

Do the Constitutions of the states in question say nothing about governors becoming autocrats for extended periods of time? The same major media that regularly accuse President Trump of being a tyrant or dictator have suddenly found great love for autocratic Republican governors and the Tenth Amendment. Wait, all this amendment says is the states retain certain rights not granted the Feds, but it doesn’t say what those rights are. Do those rights include governors becoming restaurant and hospitality industry czars?

The easiest way to get this answer is to define a few terms and then apply them to what I call The Wuhan-Bolshevik or Wushevik Revolution.

First up, exactly what is a “state”? Founding Father St. George Tucker gives a perfect answer to this question. “Thus the American states, have reserved to themselves the uncontrolled right of framing, establishing, and revoking their civil laws, and the administration of justice according to them, in all cases whatsoever, in which they have not specifically consented to the jurisdiction of the United States.”

Note that Tucker only mentions “states” — NOT individuals, governors, magistrates etc., and that is key. It is generally understood that a “state” is the legislative will of the people of a certain geographic area. This entity can elect a governor as an executive, but Article IV Section 4 clearly states they may not acquiesce to a monarch or oligarchy.

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.

Thus, The Wushevik Revolution is making autocrats of governors and serfs of the people. In principle if not in law, this is unconstitutional and an outrage to the principle of republicanism in every state and thus every citizen is guaranteed.

If you are having trouble understanding why states, meaning legislatures and conventions and not governors or the people directly, resolve the greatest questions of government policy, consider the method the Founders prescribed for a state to ratify the Constitution and enter the Union to begin with.

The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same. – Article VII, U.S Constitution

We all understand the need for governors to act in times of state emergencies. What we should be alarmed by and vigorously resist is the extension of emergency powers to everyday life, including outright bans on entire vocations and religious services. If these decisions are to persist, we should demand our legislators debate, vote and sign their name to them as acts. We should be on guard against these “emergency powers” becoming the basis for The Wushevik Revolution.

Mike Church is the Founder and Morning Drive Host of The Mike Church Show on The CRUSADE Channel. Follow him on Twitter @TheKingDude