If there is one thing that is clear from Donald Trump’s first 100 days, it is that he is not a regular president. But the courts continue to treat him as one, which is what has us barreling towards a full-blown constitutional crisis.

Jack Goldsmith, a conservative law professor at Harvard, recently described the way courts typically approach presidents: “Much of our law depends on a presumption of regularity in the presidency. It depends on the courts thinking that they can trust the president to comply with orders, and to be honest and truthful in court.”

As Professor Goldsmith suggests, much flows from the presumption of regularity. Courts assume that the president and his administration act in good faith, that their actions are lawful, their statements truthful and their motivations honest. As one early Supreme Court case stated, government officials “are assumed to be men of conscience and intellectual discipline, capable of judging a particular controversy fairly on the basis of its own circumstances.”

The consequences of this presumption are profound…

Upgrade now to read the rest! For $10/month or $120/year, Democracy Docket premium members always receive Marc’s personal insights straight into their inbox.