
<p>I have often noted that our fealty to a rule-of-law is more fantasy than reality. ; In fact, the progressive left – which touts the rule-of-law as an absolute – is largely responsible for ignoring it. ; As the big government authoritarians in the American political system, those on the left prefer to rule by edict.</p>



<p>We see examples of this in all those Democrat prosecutors who simply refuse to enforce the law – or enforce it arbitrarily based on partisan political interests. ; They say that some laws are too petty to enforce – and other laws are to be enforced excessively or not at all</p>



<p>We see this in the vigor with which prosecutors excessively enforce minor laws against minorities – and at the same time refuse to enforce laws against rioters and smash-and-dash mobs in our major cities. ; Contrast that with the massive enforcement efforts against the Capitol Hill rioters.</p>



<p>Arizona has given us another example of the left’s disdain for a rule-of-law. ;</p>



<p><strong>The back story</strong></p>



<p>Following the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the United States Supreme Court, the question arose as to whether an Arizona 1864 territorial code – later codified into law – would then be enforceable based on the fact that the law was never repealed. ;</p>



<p>If you believe that the law takes precedence over the opinion of public officials, the answer is obvious. ; Of course, the law applies &#8212; until it is taken off the books or amended by legislation. ; (Which I suspect is going to happen in Arizona.) ;</p>



<p>That was the decision of the Arizona Supreme Court. ; They were right. They were upholding the rule-of-law. ; The issue was NOT on the question of abortion – as those on the left claim. ; The Arizona court simply supported the rule-of-law as the law exists at this time.</p>



<p>That means that those sworn to uphold the law – the police, the prosecutors and the courts – will enforce the law because the LAW rules. ; Right? ; Au contraire. ; That is not how progressive Democrats operate. ; THEY will decide which laws are to be obeyed – and how vigorously they will be enforced and against whom. That is what they call “prosecutorial discretion.”</p>



<p><strong>Trashing the rule-of-law</strong></p>



<p>Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayes is the latest example of how progressive authoritarians view the rule-of-law. ; At a political rally, Mayes proudly announced that as long as SHE is the Arizona attorney general, “no woman or doctor” will be prosecuted for violating the Arizona law by HER office. She even went further to say that she would not allow prosecution by county prosecutors. ; By what authority (law) Mayes has the power to rule over county prosecutors is unclear. ; The fact that she would even claim such power is frightening.</p>



<p>Ponder that. ; One elected official openly states that she will not only NOT enforce a law declared legitimate by the state Supreme Court that she PERSONALLY does not like – but she will use whatever power or influence she may have to stop other prosecutors from enforcing the law. ; She will operate in defiance of the rule-of-law concept.</p>



<p>Mayes makes a mockery of the rule-of-law. ; She abuses “prosecutorial discretion” for political purposes. ; She operates as an authoritarian – placing her personal political interests above the law.</p>



<p>Mayes is not an outlier. ; She is part of a growing elitist establishment of progressive politicians and bureaucrats who believe THEY should rule regardless of the law. ; No matter one’s opinion on abortion, all freedom loving Americans should be terrified by such arbitrary actions by an elected public official who, in this case, has taken an oath to uphold the rule-of-law, but refuses to do so.</p>



<p>So, there ‘tis.</p>

Progressive Arizona AG shows contempt for the rule-of-law
