Read on Twitter
Just reading around the 1933 Enabling Act for no particular reason
Some general observations follow
1.
Some general observations follow
1.
When we think of 'Enabling Act' and Germany, we think of the 1933 one
But in fact it was one of several in Germany after 1919 - ten or so had been made in Weimar Germany
All for very good reasons, of course
Hitler's Enabling Act was different in scale, not in principle
2.
But in fact it was one of several in Germany after 1919 - ten or so had been made in Weimar Germany
All for very good reasons, of course
Hitler's Enabling Act was different in scale, not in principle
2.
The 1933 Enabling Act was also expressly time-bound
It was to last only for a definite period of four years
Of course, it was just then renewed (and renewed)
3.
It was to last only for a definite period of four years
Of course, it was just then renewed (and renewed)
3.
The 1933 Enabling Act also expressly stated that it would not affect the rights of the legislature or the president
Deviations from the constitution would thereby be limited
Safeguards were in place
4.
Deviations from the constitution would thereby be limited
Safeguards were in place
4.
And it was not about secret law-making
Laws were still to be published - they would just take effect the day after publication
Again, another safeguard
Laws were still to be published - they would just take effect the day after publication
Again, another safeguard
So: not a constitutional novelty, limited in duration, limited in its scope, respectful of the rights of the legislature, transparent
Nothing to worry about
(!)
We now know different, yet it is striking how, well, plausible parts of the Act could have seemed through 1933 eyes
Nothing to worry about
(!)
We now know different, yet it is striking how, well, plausible parts of the Act could have seemed through 1933 eyes
And that is the thing about 'enabling' legislation - they always seems plausible
Always some good excuse to depart from tiresome checks and balances
East to nod-along to
7.
Always some good excuse to depart from tiresome checks and balances
East to nod-along to
7.
The point here perhaps is not to say all 'enabling' legislation is like 1933 Enabling Act
Of course not, that would be a sort of legalist Godwin's law thing
The point is more subtle
For some at the time, the 1933 Enabling Act did not seem too radical or disproportionate either
Of course not, that would be a sort of legalist Godwin's law thing
The point is more subtle
For some at the time, the 1933 Enabling Act did not seem too radical or disproportionate either
Actually, I think the reason I read around the 1933 Enabling Act was because it is something 'everyone knows' as part of their general stock of knowledge
And looking at such a thing afresh is always worthwhile
It was striking how plausible it must have seen to many in 1933
And looking at such a thing afresh is always worthwhile
It was striking how plausible it must have seen to many in 1933
