| Possible? It's always absolutely been possible, but I've considered it much less likely than I do after this ruling. As we saw during the first trump administration, the army was unwilling to go along with his every desire. A general even apologized for getting pulled into a photo op. The US military is large and geographically diverse. I suspect that most would not carry out such an order. But you don't need most. You only need enough. The problem for a theoretical coup group has always been what happens afterwards. Even if they were carrying out official orders from the president, you still potentially had to face the judiciary. The rest of the military might not come after you if the president orders them to stand down, but that still left the police open as an option. The SC has now ruled that's not an issue. I do understand a lot of the logic that the executive couldn't function if every action was litigated. But I look at other countries, such as the UK, where the prime minister in fact can be jailed for crimes, and I don't see it really being an issue. Seems better to me if no one is strictly above the law. Post WW2, we recognize that the military can issue and carry out illegal orders. We should extend that to the presidency. The SC has essentially handed Biden a loaded gun. If I were him, I'd point it at the SC and fire, then point it at congress and appoint a new court that will take the loaded gun away from him. Because if Trump wins in November, you can be sure he will attempt to fire it. |
A president has always had the "military coup" option. In fact, Putin also has the "violent overthrow of the US government" option (though he would probably use his own military).