Vance and Miller: All the laws but maybe one are to go unexecuted
By 
The frightening thing is that Trump is somehow the least authoritarian crackpot in his inner circle (well, generously defining the inner circle to include the vice president)[gl]:
Inside the White House, Mr. Miller, the influential deputy chief of staff, saw an opening for an idea he had raised previously: What if Mr. Trump simply claimed the power to suspend habeas corpus?
Then the locked-up immigrants would be blocked from receiving hearings or even from seeking court orders to prevent their removal from the country. This was an opportunity for Mr. Trump not only to speed up deportations, but also to assert vastly expanded power over a legal system that was getting in his way.
Suspending habeas corpus was one of two radical ideas Mr. Miller had been pushing that alarmed Mr. Scharf. The other was invoking the Insurrection Act to deploy the military to enforce the law on American streets as protests grew against deportation sweeps.
Mr. Scharf wrote confidential memos to Ms. Wiles on both topics, setting out in a low-key way why taking either step would shatter historical norms and likely precipitate hazardous legal and constitutional battles. A senior administration official, speaking on background because the official was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly, said for this article that “senior staff” had requested the memos, and that they were seen by relatively few people.
But the documents reflected alarm among a small group of senior aides. They felt that Mr. Miller’s eagerness to test the limits of executive power — and to accuse other branches of encroaching on it, echoing a president who bristled at any constraint — risked steering the administration, and the country, in a dangerous direction.
In the case of the Insurrection Act, Vice President JD Vance pushed to invoke it just days after federal agents shot and killed Alex Pretti, a Minnesota critical care nurse who was protesting the administration’s immigration policies.
Remember when free speech in America died because James Bennet was criticized for publishing an op-ed arguing what everybody but him understood it to be arguing? I suspect he was a driving force behind Generalissimo Vance’s stint at the Times as a contributing opinion writer too.