A couple of weeks ago, when reporters from Time magazine sat down with Donald Trump in the Oval Office, the interview wrapped up on a surprisingly interesting note. One of the reporters noted that the president put up a portrait of John Adams on the wall, adding, “John Adams said we’re a government ruled by laws, not by men. Do you agree with that?”

After apparently inquiring as to which of his paintings showed the second president, Trump replied, “We’re a government ruled by laws, not by men? Well, I think we’re a government ruled by law, but you know, somebody has to administer the law. So, therefore, men — certainly, men and women — certainly play a role in it. I wouldn’t agree with it 100%.”

It was a timely reminder that the Republican has no meaningful background in political science or American civics. If he were more familiar with the subject matter, Trump would be far more familiar with the underlying concept. As University of Pennsylvania law professor Kate Shaw recently explained in a New York Times op-ed, “The basic proposition of the rule of law is that we are a society of laws, not of men. Government actors must wield their power consistent with rules that are known in advance, so people understand what’s expected of them and what consequences will attach to particular actions.”All of this, of course, came to mind watching the president reflect anew on his constitutional responsibilities. NBC News reported:

President Donald Trump argued in an interview with NBC News’ “Meet the Press” that fulfilling his ambitious campaign promise to rapidly carry out mass deportations may take precedence over giving immigrants the right to due process under the Constitution, as required by courts.

A month earlier, Secretary of State Marco Rubio also appeared on “Meet the Press” and was asked whether every person in the United States is entitled to due process. “Yes, of course,” he replied.When host Kristen Welker pressed Trump on whether he agreed with his own secretary of state for the “Meet the Press” episode that aired this past Sunday, the president replied, “I don’t know. I’m not, I’m not a lawyer. I don’t know.”

Welker noted, “Well, the Fifth Amendment says as much.” Again, Trump replied, “I don’t know.”

When the back and forth continued, and the host asked, “Don’t you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as president?” Trump responded, “I don’t know. I have to respond by saying, again, I have brilliant lawyers that work for me, and they are going to obviously follow what the Supreme Court said. What you said is not what I heard the Supreme Court said. They have a different interpretation.”

In case this isn’t obvious, Trump has twice taken the presidential oath of office, vowing to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”There is no fine print. There are no nuances or ambiguities to exploit. The apparent fact that Trump doesn’t know whether he needs to uphold the Constitution of the United States tells the public a great deal about his indifference to the rule of law.

Recommended

MS NOW Opinion

Trump’s military crackdowns have put America at a tipping point

Anthony L. Fisher

Latest

Mayor Eric Adams says ‘no formal offers’ made to be ambassador to Saudi Arabia

Erum Salam

Later in the interview, Welker asked, “Let me ask you big picture. People who have lived in countries like the Philippines, Hungary, Russia, they look at some of your actions — going after civil service, going after universities, law firms, the media — they say it’s out of an authoritarian playbook. What do you say to those who believe you are taking the country down an authoritarian path?”

The president replied, “Many people love Trump. I won the election. They didn’t win the election. I got a lot more votes than they did. I won the popular vote. I won all seven swing states by a lot. A lot of people were surprised. They said, ‘I think he could win four, maybe five.’ No, I won all seven, and I won by a lot. And I won.”

This question has come up quite a bit lately, with reporters from ABC News and The Atlantic similarly asking about Trump and authoritarianism. In each instance, instead of responding with incredulity about the underlying concern — or better yet, with categorical rejections of tyranny — the Republican has responded by pointing to his election victory.

With each passing day, Trump’s authoritarian ambitions become less subtle.