To James I, it was simply a matter of logic: a divine right ruler was not subject to English law. Sovereignty granted by God could not be limited by tradition, property rights, or Parliament; his actions were subject only to the judgment of the Almighty. If he abided by the law, it was purely a matter of grace that could be reversed at any time. He actually did respect English law and traditions in practice, but his pronouncements on the issue naturally made his subjects nervous.
In a somewhat similar vein, Donald Trump’s absurd statements about his authority to re-open businesses in the states are mostly white noise. Trump craves attention, adulation, and votes more than raw power. His idea of federalism involves him getting the credit and looking like a leader; state governments do the real work and take all of the blame. Appalling as this is, it’s more alarming on paper than it is in the real world.
Where is the DOJ on this? I’m dying to hear from Bill Barr. Does his theory of executive power go this far? Where would he find support in the Constitution for it? Would he dare cross his master and disagree in public? Inquiring minds want to know.