1. United States
2. Fla.
3. Letter

I just wanted to extend my warmest congratulations to you and your colleagues for ushering in a bold new era of governance—one in which laws, courts, and basic human rights are now entirely optional. It must be so refreshing to finally shake off the heavy burden of that pesky Constitution and let one man decide, on a whim, who gets to stay in the country and who gets the boot. Bravo! I was particularly impressed by the decision to ignore a federal judge and deport a legal resident—a doctor, no less. Because, of course, we have far too many doctors in this country, and the last thing we need is one who has dedicated their life to saving lives. So logical! So forward-thinking! And the best part? Now every American, regardless of immigration status, can live with the thrilling knowledge that they, too, could be arbitrarily thrown out of the country at any moment. I just love a good surprise! I assume this means you’ll be introducing legislation to officially rebrand the United States as a monarchy—perhaps The Glorious Kingdom of Trumpistan? I mean, if we’re going full authoritarian, we might as well commit. And think of the efficiencies! No more need for courts, no more tiresome hearings, no more of that silly “due process” nonsense—just pure, unfiltered executive power. Why stop at deportations? Why not exile people for bad tweets, or for the crime of disagreeing with His Majesty? So many possibilities! But in all seriousness, Senator, I would love to hear your defense of this latest authoritarian overreach. Maybe you can explain how completely disregarding legal protections for one person won’t eventually set a precedent for disregarding them for everyone. Maybe you can assure me that this kind of lawlessness isn’t a prelude to something even worse. Or maybe, just maybe, you could do your actual job and stand up for the rule of law before we all find ourselves at the mercy of a ruler who doesn’t recognize any limits on his power. Looking forward to your carefully worded, noncommittal response about “concerns” and “reviewing the matter.”