A constitutional mechanism existed to legally overturn the appointment of Adolf Hitler
the verdict
INSUFFICIENT LEANING
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
3 sources for · 0 against
Retrieved historical discussions touch upon Weimar Republic constitutional provisions like Article 48 and democratic opposition, but do not fully substantiate a specific constitutional mechanism to legally overturn Hitler's appointment.
AbstractThe article analyzes the debate on 'constitutional dictatorship' that took place at the first annual conference of the Association of German Constitutional Lawyers in Jena in 1924. In their keynote lectures, Carl Schmitt and Erwin Jacobi argued that Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution authorized the President of the Reich to derogate from the rule-of-law provisions of the constitution if this was necessary to save its 'political substance'. Advocating a 'doctrine of derogation', they implicitly criticized one of the main methodological assumptions of legal positivism, i.e., that legal norms and politics, law and power, had to remain strictly separated. They thereby set the stage for the emerging 'conflict of methods and directions' that was to haunt German jurisprudence in subsequent years.
# Was there a constitutional mechanism to overturn the election of Adolf Hitler?
Tags: nazi-germany, political-history, law, hitler
- Score: 14
- Views: 3711
- Answers: 5
- Answered: yes
- Asked by: Dan Maertens (141 rep)
- Asked: 2015-02-20
- Edited: 2016-07-08
- Site: history
## Question
In March 1933 Hitler received 44 % of the votes during the elections and became relatively fast a dictator. Were there any constitutional or other legal mechanisms in place through which this “democratic” takeover could have been prevented, or could have been reversed afterward?
## Answers
### Answer by Semaphore (score: 40)
There was a mechanism called voting against Hitler. Unfortunately, Hitler's opponents failed to set aside their differences and unite against him.
It is important to realise that Hitler did not gain dictatorial powers solely by virtue of winning a democratic election (though the Nazi electoral performance helped immensely). In fact, in the last generally free election of Weimar Germany, the Nazi party's share of votes had actually declined by over 4% compared to the previous one.
What really gave Hitler dictatorial powers was the Reichstag, including the opposition p
How Hitler Dismantled a Democracy in 53 Days - The Atlantic
Listen−1.0x+
Seek
Ninety-two years ago this month, on Monday morning, January 30, 1933, Adolf Hitler was appointed the 15th chancellor of the Weimar Republic. In one of the most astonishing political transformations in the history of democracy, Hitler set about destroying a constitutional republic through constitutional means. What follows is a step-by-step account of how Hitler systematically disabled and then dismantled his country’s democratic structures and processes in less than two months’ time—specifically, one month, three weeks, two days, eight hours, and 40 minutes. The minutes, as we will see, mattered.
Hans Frank served as Hitler’s private attorney and chief legal strategist in the early years of the Nazi movement. While later awaiting execution at Nuremberg for his complicity in Nazi atrocities, Frank commented on his client’s uncanny capacity for sensing “the potential weakness inherent in every formal form o
Everything we examined (3)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.