But Trump

a respected constitutional scholar discards the constitution

My most sacred values are — wait, forget it, I just changed my mind.

In 2017, the highly regarded law school dean Erwin Chemerinsky blasted Donald Trump for disrespecting the United States Constitution, which he framed as a bizarre and unforgivable offense:

Trump has shown disdain for the Constitution’s most basic values. Trump has said he would bar Muslims from entering the country. This would violate the Constitution’s guarantees of equal protection and religious freedom. Under the Constitution, a person’s dangerousness cannot be presumed because of his or her religion or ethnicity.

Trump said, “I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.” Trump apparently does not know that libel laws are state law, not federal law. More important, as president he cannot change the First Amendment limits on recovery for defamation that the Supreme Court has imposed for over 50 years.

In 2024, the same Erwin Chemerinsky — the one who thought disrespect for our constitutional order was disqualifying for public officials — announces that the Constitution is obsolete, an impediment, and in need of replacement. The New York Times approves, weighing in with a respectful book review essay:

How fascinating to watch all of the people who warned that Donald Trump threatens our political norms pivoting to an urgent demand to smash all of our political norms.

I’ve talked to Erwin Chemerinsky, though it’s been a long time. I used to call him as a source, back when I worked for suburban newspapers, during local free speech controversies. He struck me as a free speech absolutist, and a defender of an open discourse. So I thought the reports of his newfound distaste for the Constitution must be exaggerated, and his actual argument must be much more subtle and scholarly.

It’s not. You can read the introduction to his new book, No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States, by clicking on the Amazon preview (“Look Inside,” on the left of the page). He actually calls for Americans to discard our Constitution and adopt a new one:

And here’s why — read this carefully:

We have this weird reverence for the thing, but the Constitution has enabled inequality, so it must be eliminated. There’s a sledgehammer hiding behind that sentence. Government isn’t substantially redistributing wealth, so it’s “not functioning.”

Read the whole introduction: He’s calling for a new constitution for the purpose of creating a much more powerful central government that can undertake the aggressive and unchallenged reshaping of our social, cultural, and economic order. The second page of Chemerinsky’s “prologue,” for example, warns that social media allows people to spread lies and disinformation, which makes the First Amendment dangerous. If we accept that premise, what comes next? Also, the Electoral College is a feature of our Constitution, and it allowed Trump to win, so the Constitution is very bad.

It’s the Veruca Salt Postulate: I don’t like what happens under this set of rules, so I want new rules.

His argument isn’t about the reasonableness of public structures and shared rules — it’s about what he wants to do. The Constitution doesn’t allow Erwin Chemerinsky to reshape society the way he wants society to be reshaped, so he wants to get rid of it.

So:

1. Trump has shown disdain for the Constitution, and that’s very dangerous;

2. Also, we must discard the Constitution as soon as possible.

The Trump years are revealing the astonishing hollowness of the liberal order and its grandees. Did any of these people ever believe in anything, really?