The Constitutional Charade

How the Republican Party Became a Party That Believes the Constitution Only Applies to Its Enemies

Photo by Jean on Unsplash

This is, after all, a philosophy blog.

But let’s talk about constitutional hypocrisy so brazen, so comprehensive, so morally bankrupt that it would be laughable if it weren’t so dangerous to the republic.

I’ve learned something about modern Republicans that crystallizes everything wrong with our current political moment: they care more about the constitutionality of Biden’s student debt forgiveness than they do about the 4th and 5th Amendments being universally applied. Let that sink in for a moment.

They’ll spend months screaming about executive overreach when it comes to loan forgiveness—a legitimate constitutional concern, to be fair. But when it comes to the systematic violation of due process rights, when it comes to warrantless searches and seizures, when it comes to the weaponization of law enforcement against political opponents—suddenly, constitutional principles become negotiable.

This isn’t principled constitutional interpretation. This is weaponized constitutionalism—using the Constitution as a cudgel against political enemies while ignoring it entirely when it constrains their own power.

Two plus two equals four. There are twenty-four hours in a day. And the Republican Party has become a fascist organization that simply doesn’t think the Constitution applies to its enemies.

We’ve never seen anything like this in either party in our history until now. Not during the Civil War, when Lincoln suspended habeas corpus but acknowledged he was acting in constitutional gray areas. Not during World War II, when FDR interned Japanese Americans but at least maintained the pretense that all citizens deserved constitutional protection. Not during Watergate, when even Nixon’s defenders argued he was acting within presidential prerogatives rather than claiming he was above the law entirely.

What we’re witnessing now is different. It’s a party that wants power, and it wants that power to be unchallenged by legal or democratic constraints. It’s pushing in every direction it can to solidify its grip on power—from trying to steal elections (like they attempted in North Carolina recently) to illegally shutting down entire government departments mandated by Congress because they perceive them to be filled with ideological enemies.

This is a coup. And the entire party is participating in it.

It wasn’t always this way. The Republican Party once had genuine constitutional conservatives—people like Barry Goldwater, who famously said “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, but moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue,” yet still believed in constitutional constraints on power. People like John McCain, who defended the independence of democratic institutions even when it hurt him politically. People like Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, who put constitutional duty above party loyalty.

But here’s what happened: the Republicans who were actually committed to constitutional government were systematically purged from the party. They were branded “RINOs”—Republicans In Name Only—for the sin of believing that constitutional principles should apply even when inconvenient. They were primaried out by candidates who promised more aggressive partisan warfare. They found the door themselves when they could no longer stomach what their party was becoming.

The result is a party that has been hollowed out of anyone who might provide internal resistance to authoritarian drift. The constitutional conservatives didn’t change their principles—they were driven out for having principles at all.

What remains is a party captured by people who view constitutional constraints as obstacles to be overcome rather than principles to be upheld. They kept the constitutional rhetoric—it polls well and provides useful cover—but abandoned the constitutional substance entirely.

The constitutional charade works like this: When Democrats exercise executive power, Republicans discover a sudden, passionate commitment to constitutional limits, separation of powers, and congressional prerogatives. But when Republicans exercise power, these same principles become obstacles to effective governance that must be swept aside in the name of efficiency, national security, or fighting the “deep state.”

Student loan forgiveness? Constitutional crisis! The president can’t possibly have that authority! Where’s Congress? What about the separation of powers?

Defying Supreme Court orders? Well, the Court overstepped its bounds. The executive has inherent authority. Sometimes you have to break a few constitutional eggs to make an authoritarian omelet.

Weaponizing the Justice Department against political opponents? That’s just effective law enforcement. Besides, those people are criminals anyway—due process is a technicality that gets in the way of justice.

Shutting down congressionally mandated agencies? Congress doesn’t understand the complexities of modern governance. The executive knows best. Constitutional requirements are suggestions.

This selective constitutionalism reveals what the modern Republican Party has become: an organization that uses constitutional language tactically while abandoning constitutional principles strategically. The Constitution is useful when it can be weaponized against opponents and inconvenient when it constrains their own authority.

And anybody who claims to oppose this but strategically votes Republican over some issue like trans rights or “woke” culture or taxes is a fool. And a moral traitor to the country.

I don’t care how much you hate progressive social policies. I don’t care how frustrated you are with Democratic economic proposals. I don’t care how offended you are by campus speech codes or diversity training or whatever cultural issue keeps you up at night.

None of that—none of it—justifies voting for a party that has abandoned constitutional government entirely. When you vote for Republicans because you’re angry about trans athletes or critical race theory, you’re not making a strategic choice about policy priorities. You’re voting to end constitutional democracy in America.

You’re saying that your cultural grievances matter more than the rule of law. That your policy preferences matter more than the Constitution itself. That your ideological comfort matters more than preserving the system that makes democratic debate possible in the first place.

This isn’t hyperbole. This isn’t partisan exaggeration. This is the documented reality of what the Republican Party has become: an organization dedicated to establishing one-party rule through the systematic dismantling of constitutional constraints on power.

The tragedy is that the party once had voices who might have prevented this transformation. But they were systematically silenced, marginalized, and expelled for the sin of taking constitutional principles seriously. What remains is a hollowed-out shell using constitutional rhetoric to justify unconstitutional behavior.

And to argue that the GOP is the better party for judicial matters while that very party is actively trying to turn public opinion against the judiciary? That’s very special indeed.

They spent decades building the conservative legal movement, appointing originalist judges, claiming they were restoring respect for the Constitution and the rule of law. And now, when those same courts occasionally issue rulings they don’t like, suddenly the judiciary is illegitimate, biased, part of the “deep state” conspiracy against real Americans.

The Supreme Court isn’t conservative enough when it occasionally rules against Republican interests. Lower courts are activist when they enforce constitutional rights. The entire federal judiciary becomes suspect when it tries to maintain some independence from partisan political pressure.

This is how authoritarianism works: first you capture institutions, then you delegitimize any institution you can’t fully control. First you pack the courts with ideological allies, then you attack the courts when even your allies occasionally follow the law instead of your preferences.

We are watching the live-action implementation of fascism in America, carried out by people who wrap themselves in the flag while systematically destroying what that flag represents. They invoke the Constitution while violating its most basic principles. They claim to defend democracy while working to dismantle democratic institutions.

And the most morally disgusting part? They expect us to treat this as normal political competition. They expect us to pretend that this is just another partisan disagreement, just another election cycle, just another policy debate between competing visions of American governance.

It’s not. This is a party that has purged its constitutional conservatives and embraced authoritarianism. This is a party that believes the Constitution applies to its enemies but not to itself. This is a party that will use any means necessary to gain and maintain power, including the systematic destruction of the legal and institutional frameworks that make democratic self-governance possible.

If you vote for this party for any reason—if you prioritize any policy preference over the preservation of constitutional democracy—you are complicit in the destruction of the American republic. You are helping to dismantle the system that makes political disagreement possible in the first place.

The constitutional conservatives didn’t abandon the Republican Party. The Republican Party abandoned them. What remains is the advancing edge of American fascism dressed up in constitutional rhetoric.

Two plus two equals four. There are twenty-four hours in a day. And anyone who can’t see that the modern Republican Party represents an existential threat to constitutional democracy is either willfully blind or actively complicit in its destruction.

The center must be held. And holding it requires recognizing that there is no center left in the Republican Party—only the hollowed-out shell of what was once a constitutional conservative movement, now captured entirely by forces that view the Constitution as an obstacle rather than a foundation.

Choose accordingly.