Tyranny of the Majority

Several of the founders of our nation and constitution expressed concerns that direct and total rule by the majority could itself lead to tyranny.

Several elements were built into the Constitution to offer some protection against this very possibility.

That exact same protection was improved significantly with the first 10 amendments, The Bill of Rights.

The proposed amendment to create the office of Vice President for the Minority follows in that tradition.

A recent Abuse of all taxpayers by both Majority and Minority

In 2025 and 2026, a large number of individuals and interests, aligned with the current Majority, have made large monetary claims against the DOJ and thus against the taxpayers of the United States.  These individuals and interests are supporters of the Majority faction which itself currently controls the DOJ. Thus, the DOJ has no interest or incentive to zealously advocate against these parties.

Members of the current Majority should realize that, should their faction become the Minority in a future election cycle, the same lack of zealous advocacy could further encourage abuse of the treasury for additional, likely unjust and purely partisan causes.

Remember...DOGE...?  DOGE was a interesting diagnostic tool, but it lacked the legal and constitutional foundation to survive. The moment the political winds shifted, the establishment quietly shut down DOGE. We don't need another temporary commission that can be deleted with the stroke of a pen. We need a permanent, constitutional Watchdog directly baked into the Executive branch—ensuring that whoever is out of power always has a legal and constitutional power to expose Washington's waste and corruption.

Lack of Adversarial legal position versus Executive

Without this amendment, should a group like Antifa storm the capitol during an election certification and later be convicted of serious crimes, the a president of the party they support could require DOJ to dismiss the cases against them...without...an adversarial challenge in court.

Is "domestic tranquility" served by having the President be able to so easily reward violent and clearly illegal behaviors that serve that President and his political faction?

Executive and DOJ actions in 2025 and 2026 show that an adversarial voice within the Executive branch is a need overlooked in the constitution.  This is the most important feature of the proposed amendment.

​

The word "Minority" in this context

Minority means "minority" of votes and/or of electoral votes.  Minority here does not mean racial, ethnic or cultural minority.

Alternative title:  "Opposition Vice President" or "Pluralistic" similar.  "Shadow Vice President", "Consensual Vice President" are other possibilities. Some criterial for selection of the name of the office. 1) Constitutional clarity.  That the "Vice President" and "Vice President for the Minority" are two distinct offices must be legally clear.  2) The name must fairly clearly describe the intent of the office.  3) A name which "sells" the concept could be useful too.

Minority does not mean literal, precise minority/majority as in determinations of runoff elections. Minority as used here means the "second largest" group of voters, and/or the loyal opposition to the elected and/or certified current administration.

The Electoral College

Some of our fellow citizens find the "Electoral College" to be a deeply flawed and unsatisfactory system. 

The proposal here is intended to be ...independent... of the issue of the "Electoral College". 

As long as the President is selected by ...voting...,whether electoral or popular, the proposal here arguably has merit independent of the concerns/discussion about the affects of the "Electoral College" on democracy. Should the "Electoral College" be abolished by a separate amendment or agreement of the states, the need for the proposed office and amendment to have a Vice President of the Minority remains, undiminished.

Campaign Finance Reform

Some of our fellow citizens have proposed various ideas to reform campaign finance laws, rules and regulations. Yet, exactly...who...will enforce those laws, rules and regulations?  The Department of Justice directly beholden to the current President and Party? The FEC, Federal Election Commission is, as of June 30, 2026 entirely subject to the whims of the President of the United States and the Senate Majority.  Where those two are of the same party, the FEC can no longer be "non-partisan".

The proposed office of Vice President for the Minority would, with its firing veto and Minority DOJ restore the possibility "non-partisan" commissions and other agencies having some semblance of non-partisanship.

This officer shall be determined from the second highest electoral votes for the office of President. 

Rationale(s):  The original draft of the constitution had the ordinary Vice President selected as the runner-up.  That selection method was intended as one of the protections against "Tyranny of the Majority". The purpose here is not to return to that original arrangement in full.  The purpose here is to reuse the underlying concept and original rationale for a specifically limited set of powers for the additional constitutional office.

​The Vice President for the Minority shall control a “Minority Department of Justice” appointing a minority “Attorney General” and related. The budget of the "Minority Department of Justice" shall be some modest percentage (example: 10%) of the main Department of Justice. 

​Rationale(s): The two partisan camps at present have both claimed that the Department of Justice has been and/or is being weaponized for partisan political purposes.  The proposal here intentionally allows for two partisan groups to ...continually... investigate...each other.  The proposal here allows for the existing systems of grand juries, judges, juries and appeals to continue to check abuses.  Abuse by ...omission... of prosecution is also eliminated or reduced. 

​An additional possibility exists: Elimination of the guidelines of "Not opening investigations" before elections might be eliminated as top two partisan camps would be able to make all the "noise" they desire in lead up to the election.

The concept here, ironically is NOT to end "weaponization" and "lawfare" but to provide the opportunity to "put up or shut-up" to leaders of any/either political party. The possibility exists that having two distinct "Departments of Justice" might put all political actors "on their toes" to avoid criminal, illegal or unconstitutional actions.

Historical context of power of prosecution

The author's interest in the concept proposed here prompted some AI queries.  The author was impressed by the changes over human history to what authorities in a government or society were assigned the roles of prosecutors. Of particular interest was that in England, the mechanisms here changed significantly in the last 2 or 3 centuries. In addition, the current American system for prosecutors is fairly new in human history.  This historical context suggests that the role of prosecutors and prosecutions in addressing crime does not have so much historical inertia and gravitas that change might be unwise or irrational.

The Vice President for the Minority shall have veto power on any firings by the President from Congressionally protected offices intended to be immune from political influence (such as, but not limited to, the Federal Reserve, Department of Justice US Attorneys).

​Rationale(s): There are several positions created by Congress where Congress clearly had the intent to make the position "non-partisan". The current Supreme Court has allowed, seemingly, protection for only one office, Chairman of the Federal Reserve. For others challenged through 2025 and 2026, no such protection has been provided.  The wording of the Congressional statues was insufficiently rigorous to limit the arbitrary use of firing by the President.

The recent Supreme Court decision in Trump v. Slaughter which, in essence, overturned Humphrey's Executor essentially can ONLY be fully and permanently addressed by a constitutional amendment.  In contrast, suggestions to reform the Supreme Court by enlarging it and/or by instituting ethics guidelines are superficial, abusable by the opposite faction and untargeted to this one specific problem.

The proposal here is to give Congress a clear mechanism to protect such offices as Congress deems fit to have such protection.  The amendment proposal here does not intend to give the Vice President for the Minority unlimited power to block any and all Presidential firings. Some additional offices which might well be added to the "non-partisan" list might include:  Director of the FBI, Attorney General, various "Inspector Generals".  Another class of firings that should be subject to this proposed veto would be appointments by judges under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.

The Vice President for the Minority shall have the authority and standing to bring cases against the US Government for the entire country

Rationale(s): This provision is intended to appeal to both of the current political parties and their respective leaders. 

For Trump and the MAGA-Republicans, a 2020 installation of Trump, as runner-up in Electoral College to Vice President for the Minority, would have given him 4 years and a budget to use to attempt to investigate and prove his many claims (so often proven false?), that the 2020 election was "stolen".  A minority like that particular minority, could pursue investigations and prosecutions of crimes they feel are under-treated by the Majority DOJ.

For Democrats, Constitutional (former) Republicans and Independents, a 2024 installation of runner-up Kamala Harris as Vice President for the Minority, would have allowed a challenge either criminally or civilly, of several actions by the majority DOJ led by the current president.  In addition, as elsewhere, the Vice President for the Minority would have the ability to veto the firing of certain appointments like Office of Inspector General, Office of Professional Responsibility. The recent case of DOJ agreeing to pay Michael Flynn 1.25 million for a claimed wrongful prosecution lawsuit had no challenge for the people of the United States.  One of the prime intents of the amendment proposal here is to provide a challenger with standing in such a case.  All political sides should be aware that this one case shows a weakness in the Constitution though which ...any...bad faith actor or ...any...political persuasion could take unfair and undeserved advantage of the People of the United States.

A system as proposed to reward successful (meritful?) investigations, prosecutions and SCOTUS appeals and punish (meritless) such actions is intended to encourage serious treatment by the two DOJ's rather than political, vengeful or bad-faith efforts. Such a system might even be used to demonstrate to the public the effectiveness of one, the other or both of the two DOJ's.  The author of the amendment proposal believes the proposed amendment is sufficiently durable to withstand a raft of "bad-faith" actions of opposing political sides, the author would like to encourage elected leaders to act in good faith and voters to select leaders who demonstrate a general desire to act in good faith.

A fun(?) brainstorming piece:

The power to bring certain cases by the Vice President for the Minority shall be limited to some fixed number of cases per Presidential term.  Should the minority win a case in the Supreme Court 9-0, they shall be awarded 2 additional challenge opportunities.  Should the minority lose a case in the Supreme Court 0-9, they shall lose 1 challenge opportunity in the current term or in the next term.

Issues for which the Vice President for the Minority could appeal (to Supreme Court or lower courts):

1) Anti-Weaponization Fund Settlements

2) General results of a Presidential Election

3) Any action by the executive or law created by Congress that might be considered unconstitutional.

4) Cases against the elected majority's executive branch officials where those officials are insufficient adversaries of themselves which would otherwise lead to collusive lawsuits.