[Kay Soze]

I am not an Atty.

I do question how the president can set aside the US Constitution and only be challenged politically but not legally.

Is there provision(s) to stop a president from simply "shredding" the constitution?

And if there is why haven’t those steps been taken or started?

I recall Nixon resigning not because of the break in but because he fired the special prosecutor assigned to investigate the cover up, which it was revealed was a violation of the constitution. Impeachment proceedings were imminent so he quit.

I am curious if so many legal eagles know for certain these tribunals are illegal and shred the US Constitution it would then be a simple matter to start confronting this in the courts.

Why haven’t they done so?

[backup]

Is there provision(s) to stop a president from simply "shredding" the constitution?

The Second Amendment.

[Southack]

"I am curious if so many legal eagles know for certain these tribunals are illegal and shred the US Constitution it would then be a simple matter to start confronting this in the courts."

Military tribunals are legal for the actions of every American military warrior, hence the UCMJ and courts martial. Likewise, such tribunals are legal for every foreign warrior who finds himself at the wrong end of an American rifle.