Eric PosnerThinkers

A Constitutional crisis is a situation exemplified by when Nixon and Congress disagreed about the contours of presidential authority, including executive privilege.

A Constitutional crisis is a situation exemplified in 1868 when Johnson and Congress disagreed about whether Johnson had violated the law by trying to fire the secretary of war, Edwin Stanton.

A Constitutional crisis is a situation that could also be said to exist whenever there is deep and persistent dissatisfaction with a constitutional system.

A Constitutional crisis is a time in which normal politics is pushed into the background. In extreme cases, government officials may not be able to take routine actions or make ordinary decisions because of uncertainty about lines of authority and government powers.

A Constitutional crisis is a time when ordinary governance by the national government becomes impossible.

A Constitutional crisis is an event demanding some change to the Constitution. If constitutional reform is not needed, or at least not urgently needed, then it is normal politics.

A Constitutional crisis is best understood by analogy with financial crisis, economic crisis, military crisis, or political crisis, where the system in question freezes up into an impasse, generating uncertainty about the nation's capacity and possible consequences.

A Constitutional crisis is closely related to a political crisis, which occurs when normal political bargaining and compromise are replaced with an impasse with no obvious end.

A Constitutional crisis is either the result of profound good-faith disagreement about what the constitution requires, or of the rejection of the constitutional order, or elements of it by a significant group.

A Constitutional crisis is exemplified by Andrew Johnson's administration and impasses over his 1868 firing of the secretary of war.

A Constitutional crisis is exemplified by executive privilege debates and related matters during the Nixon administration.

A Constitutional crisis is exemplified by the four years of the Civil war during which the president continued to use the war power and the legal status of the southern states remained unsettled.

A Constitutional crisis is manifest in one of two ways: either as a “crisis-as-disruption” (i.e. when government ceases to function because of profound disagreement about what the constitution requires) or as a "crisis-as-dissatisfaction" (i.e. whenever a substantial portion of the public expresses dissatisfaction with the constitutional order, or opposing political forces appear deadlocked and unable to implement policy that is broadly needed).

Donald Trump is at the center of a constitutional crisis in the making, in part, also because public debate was poisoned by foreign influence working through social media.

Donald Trump is both the result of, and a further contribution to, a constitutional crisis-as-dissatisfaction.

Donald Trump is flirting with a constitutional crisis because he won the election despite losing the popular vote, an outcome that is hard to justify under the principle of popular sovereignty.

Donald Trump is flirting with a constitutional crisis in that dissatisfaction could produce disruption at any moment and our constitutional system seems to have reached a point where constitutional reform is urgent.

Donald Trump is flirting with a constitutional crisis in that his electoral victory was predicated on right-wing populist attacks on the political establishment and on the major institutions of our constitutional democracy.

Donald Trump is flirting with a constitutional crisis of dissatisfaction in part because gerrymandering has damaged the democratic accountability of Congress.

Donald Trump is flirting with a constitutional crisis when he gives a widespread sense that core institutions are in danger by frequently attacking, with violent language, constitutionally protected institutions-the press and the judiciary, above all-and showed contempt for constitutionally protected norms of equal citizenship and political competition.