Samuel Damren
This commentary focuses on the immediate aftermath of the American experience of living under the rule of a king and the steps the Founding Fathers took to prevent its recurrence.
It follows a three-part series comparing the oppressive acts of King George III with similar anti-democratic acts by Donald Trump in his second term as president.
To guard against the threat posed by “would-be” kings, the Founders provided checks and balances in the Constitution on separate branches of government, a Bill of Rights for individuals and elections secured and controlled by independent States.
James Madison authored the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. He initially opposed the amendments thinking they were unnecessary. After it was pointed out that the British Crown made similar arguments only to repeatedly and deceitfully trample on colonist rights, Madison changed his mind.
The most powerful protection against a repetition of the tyrannies of King George III is the right to vote.
The story of how “the vote” became the essential touchstone of American democracy and the true meaning of “We, the People,” involves James Wilson, a little-known Founding Father.
Wilson was born in Scotland in 1742. He was raised during the period of the Scottish Enlightenment, graduating from St. Andrews University, and then migrating to the American colonies in 1765. Wilson settled in Philadelphia and began the study of law under John Dickinson, who also later became a Founding Father.
Wilson is one of only six men who signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Additionally, he was an associate justice on the first serving United States Supreme Court. With those three accomplishments, he stands alone in American political history.
The last chapter of historian Jude Pfister’s book, “Defining America in the Radical 1760s” highlights Wilson’s central role in making voting rights “the greatest weapon that a free citizen has.”
Pfizer notes that George Washington is given “more than his fair share” of credit for the military victory over Britain, but “Wilson, due to his intense involvement in the American political process … became the victor in the struggle to find the foundation of American liberty: human law; [an evolution which] saw ‘Nature’s God’ in the Declaration become ‘We, the People’ in the Constitution.”
Wilson’s 1768 essay titled “Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Authority of the British Parliament,” confronted the theory of “virtual representation.” The theory asserted that while colonists did not elect representatives to Parliament, they were well served by legislators elected by British voters who had the colonials “best interests in mind.”
The Pro-Monarchist argument was predicated on the colonies’ supposed “creation by royal decree” and thereby “dependence” on the British Crown for very existence. Consequently, the argument went, American settlers and their descendants would be forever obliged by bonds of fealty to adhere to the form of colonial government the King ordained.
In the essay, Wilson adeptly countered this version of “divine right of Kings” by arguing that what was the legal right of British voters to elect and remove members of Parliament was equally a right of Englishmen emigrating to America.
“The power of elections has ever been regarded as a point of the last consequence to all free governments. The independent exercise of that power is justly deemed the strongest bulwark of the British liberties.” In Wilson’s view, “long parliaments” where kings suspend elections were themselves “prejudicial” to good governance.
“Frequent new parliaments” are preferred so that “the people have numerous opportunities of displaying their just importance, and … representatives are reminded whose creatures they are; and to whom they are accountable …[for] all power is derived from the people.”
Because the colonies were never “conquered lands” that could be subject to such “slavery,” Wilson further asserted that Parliament could never legitimately represent colonists’ interests in conducting their own elections for candidates of their choosing.
Guided by Wilson’s hand, the later constructed Constitution placed administration and the integrity of American elections under the control of each state independent of outside control by other politicians.
With the recent confirmation by the Senate of Todd Blanche as attorney general of the United States, the issue of the continued independence of state control over elections is now a matter of legitimate concern.
As attorney general, Blanche enjoys nationwide investigative authority, the ability to criminally charge state election officials, and a record of bending to his client’s will even if doing so conflicts with legal and professional obligations.
In the past, when Donald Trump sought to pursue false narratives regarding election results, he had to call Secretaries of State for assistance. AGs in the prior Trump administration did not bend to his will on this issue.
Today, if Donald Trump “needs to come up with 11,790 votes” in Georgia – recall Trump’s taped conversation with Brad Raffensperger – or in some other state, he can call the new AG. More likely than not, Blanche will instigate criminal investigations and impound election ballots as the president directs; all to subvert the Constitutional structure of American government.
Trump struck out in the courts in attempts to overturn election results in 2020. None of the allegations of fraud had factual support. Despite these rebukes, Trump is “doubling down” in his criticisms of the electoral process and the courts in the lead up to the mid-term elections.
A significant issue for office holders in Michigan and their successors is how they prepare for and stand up to Trump’s next round of attacks – supercharged by his new AG.
An equally significant question for voters in the 2026 election is which candidates for statewide office will be best able to effectively continue this advocacy and which candidates are more likely to knuckle under to Trump attacks.
Trump fears the results of the mid-term elections because they could restore meaningful checks and balances to counter his overreach of power.
That is as it should be and it is how Americans overthrow “would be” Kings in the democracy created by the Founding Fathers with special thanks to Founding Father James Wilson.
It follows a three-part series comparing the oppressive acts of King George III with similar anti-democratic acts by Donald Trump in his second term as president.
To guard against the threat posed by “would-be” kings, the Founders provided checks and balances in the Constitution on separate branches of government, a Bill of Rights for individuals and elections secured and controlled by independent States.
James Madison authored the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. He initially opposed the amendments thinking they were unnecessary. After it was pointed out that the British Crown made similar arguments only to repeatedly and deceitfully trample on colonist rights, Madison changed his mind.
The most powerful protection against a repetition of the tyrannies of King George III is the right to vote.
The story of how “the vote” became the essential touchstone of American democracy and the true meaning of “We, the People,” involves James Wilson, a little-known Founding Father.
Wilson was born in Scotland in 1742. He was raised during the period of the Scottish Enlightenment, graduating from St. Andrews University, and then migrating to the American colonies in 1765. Wilson settled in Philadelphia and began the study of law under John Dickinson, who also later became a Founding Father.
Wilson is one of only six men who signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Additionally, he was an associate justice on the first serving United States Supreme Court. With those three accomplishments, he stands alone in American political history.
The last chapter of historian Jude Pfister’s book, “Defining America in the Radical 1760s” highlights Wilson’s central role in making voting rights “the greatest weapon that a free citizen has.”
Pfizer notes that George Washington is given “more than his fair share” of credit for the military victory over Britain, but “Wilson, due to his intense involvement in the American political process … became the victor in the struggle to find the foundation of American liberty: human law; [an evolution which] saw ‘Nature’s God’ in the Declaration become ‘We, the People’ in the Constitution.”
Wilson’s 1768 essay titled “Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Authority of the British Parliament,” confronted the theory of “virtual representation.” The theory asserted that while colonists did not elect representatives to Parliament, they were well served by legislators elected by British voters who had the colonials “best interests in mind.”
The Pro-Monarchist argument was predicated on the colonies’ supposed “creation by royal decree” and thereby “dependence” on the British Crown for very existence. Consequently, the argument went, American settlers and their descendants would be forever obliged by bonds of fealty to adhere to the form of colonial government the King ordained.
In the essay, Wilson adeptly countered this version of “divine right of Kings” by arguing that what was the legal right of British voters to elect and remove members of Parliament was equally a right of Englishmen emigrating to America.
“The power of elections has ever been regarded as a point of the last consequence to all free governments. The independent exercise of that power is justly deemed the strongest bulwark of the British liberties.” In Wilson’s view, “long parliaments” where kings suspend elections were themselves “prejudicial” to good governance.
“Frequent new parliaments” are preferred so that “the people have numerous opportunities of displaying their just importance, and … representatives are reminded whose creatures they are; and to whom they are accountable …[for] all power is derived from the people.”
Because the colonies were never “conquered lands” that could be subject to such “slavery,” Wilson further asserted that Parliament could never legitimately represent colonists’ interests in conducting their own elections for candidates of their choosing.
Guided by Wilson’s hand, the later constructed Constitution placed administration and the integrity of American elections under the control of each state independent of outside control by other politicians.
With the recent confirmation by the Senate of Todd Blanche as attorney general of the United States, the issue of the continued independence of state control over elections is now a matter of legitimate concern.
As attorney general, Blanche enjoys nationwide investigative authority, the ability to criminally charge state election officials, and a record of bending to his client’s will even if doing so conflicts with legal and professional obligations.
In the past, when Donald Trump sought to pursue false narratives regarding election results, he had to call Secretaries of State for assistance. AGs in the prior Trump administration did not bend to his will on this issue.
Today, if Donald Trump “needs to come up with 11,790 votes” in Georgia – recall Trump’s taped conversation with Brad Raffensperger – or in some other state, he can call the new AG. More likely than not, Blanche will instigate criminal investigations and impound election ballots as the president directs; all to subvert the Constitutional structure of American government.
Trump struck out in the courts in attempts to overturn election results in 2020. None of the allegations of fraud had factual support. Despite these rebukes, Trump is “doubling down” in his criticisms of the electoral process and the courts in the lead up to the mid-term elections.
A significant issue for office holders in Michigan and their successors is how they prepare for and stand up to Trump’s next round of attacks – supercharged by his new AG.
An equally significant question for voters in the 2026 election is which candidates for statewide office will be best able to effectively continue this advocacy and which candidates are more likely to knuckle under to Trump attacks.
Trump fears the results of the mid-term elections because they could restore meaningful checks and balances to counter his overreach of power.
That is as it should be and it is how Americans overthrow “would be” Kings in the democracy created by the Founding Fathers with special thanks to Founding Father James Wilson.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
