December 2, 2020
Trump supporters have a real decision to make: do we want to be a nation of laws under the Constitution, or do we want to be a dictatorship? Normally, I would not think I would have to ask that question of a group of which I consider myself a member, but these are not ordinary times.
Case in point: an attorney who has been working on behalf of (but apparently not at the behest of) President Trump has called on the president to declare martial law in order to hold a new election. In echoing a full-page Washington Times ad by the “We the People Convention,” Mr. Wood stated that “Our country is headed to civil war. A war created by 3rd party bad actors for their benefit—not for We The People. Communist China is leading the nefarious efforts to take away our freedom. @realDonaldTrump should declare martial law.”
Mr. Wood has earned my respect merely for taking up the defamation suit against The Washington Post for Nicholas Sandmann, but he has also worked on a number of other high-profile cases, including the case of Richard Jewell, and most recently, the case of Kyle Rittenhouse. Mr. Wood has been a good guy for his whole career, so why would he suggest something so reckless?
What is worse is that this idea seems to have some traction among Trump supporters. In a Twitter poll issued by user @LegendaryEnergy, with 20 hours remaining, 3,673 people had voted on the question of whether participants agreed with Lin Wood’s suggestion that Trump declare marital law. As of the writing of this column, 50.9% said “Yeah Do It,” while 30.1% said “Nah. Don’t do it.” Another 18.9% had apparently only recently become sentient, as they had no opinion on the matter.
While the poll is far from scientific, one does not have to search very hard to find the palpable anger among Trump supporters that would tend to confirm the poll. They understandably believe that this election was stolen from them. With that in mind, they are frightened for what that means in the future, and many of them have taken an absolutist stance by saying that this stolen election cannot be allowed to stand lest we never have a fair and clean election again. What is worse is that many in Georgia have decided to boycott the two senate runoffs that will decide which party controls the Senate. Mr. Wood, again, is at the center of that trend as well, openly encouraging the boycott as if losing an election by apathy is somehow better than losing by fraud.
I am completely sympathetic to these concerns. After hearing the evidentiary presentations by Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Attorney Jenna Ellis in front of the Pennsylvania and Arizona Legislatures, I think there is clear and convincing evidence that there were so many bad acts and bad actors in this election, it is difficult, if not impossible to know who actually won a plurality of the legal votes in either of those states. I believe the same kind of evidence will be introduced in Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada. I believe there are other states that had similar issues such as California and Virginia. It is entirely unacceptable that in the greatest country in the history of mankind, in the year 2020, we cannot fully trust our election system. It is a great travesty and should not be accepted by anyone.
But as for this election, if we are to be a nation of laws under the Constitution, we must accept the constitutional remedies lest we descend into chaos. The Constitution allows for election issues to be tried and resolved by courts of law at both the state and federal levels depending on the issues presented. If the initial cases do not go our way, we can appeal multiple times. If, however, the appeals do not go our way, there is no judicial remedy left. Like a wrongfully convicted criminal defendant, we must accept that due process has been afforded, and we simply lost. But, unlike that defendant, the Founding Fathers also put forth a number of additional protections for presidential elections, including the individual state legislatures, the Electoral College, and Congress’ role in counting electors. In other words, the Constitution and the laws of the land anticipate close and contentious elections, and both give voters and candidates many options to pursue. Martial law is not one of them.
Besides being dangerous, Mr. Wood’s suggestion is simply unconstitutional on multiple levels. President Trump cannot declare martial law and order a new election under his constitutional powers. It is simply impossible. To do so, he would essentially be appointing himself as dictator, and who could trust a new election under such circumstances?
What Mr. Wood suggests would undoubtedly start the civil war to which he believes we are headed. I say all of this with unwavering support for President Trump’s legal actions and the cases he is taking to legislatures across the country. I support him, I have donated to his legal efforts, and if he comes up short, I will be an early supporter for 2024. I know President Trump is not foolish enough to listen to such short-sighted recommendations, but it is his supporters that I am afraid may see martial law as being a useful and viable option. It is not. In fact, it is probably the absolute worst thing he could do in this situation. We, as supporters of Trump and free, fair elections must not lose hope, and we must not fight lawlessness with lawlessness. Trust that our Constitutional process is good, and if we come up short, let us work together within the law to make sure this never happens again.
David J. Gregors is the host of the podcast, “Connect Your Audio.” He received his Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy and Religious Studies, Juris Doctor, and Master of Laws (LLM) in Health Law and Public Policy. Follow on Twitter @davidgregors.