SWANK Position 002

SWANK POSITION PAGE 002 — MISUSE OF AUTHORITY IN ENFORCEMENT

This document records the point at which enforcement ceases to be judgment and becomes momentum.

It follows directly from Position Page 001.

Once authority stops responding, enforcement does not correct the failure.
It operationalizes it.

This position examines how enforcement systems substitute:

• presence for assessment,
• command for dialogue,
• escalation for understanding,
• and procedure for legitimacy.

The result is not error.
It is design.

What This Position Establishes

Authority exists to respond to reality, not to override it.

Where enforcement cannot pause, it cannot claim proportionality.
Where control precedes understanding, legitimacy collapses before accountability arrives.

This is not a retrospective critique.
It is a structural constraint.

What This Is

• The second foundational position in a closed ethical doctrine
• A constraint on enforcement authority, not a commentary on individuals
• A citation-stable Canon entry

What This Is Not

• A case analysis
• A policy recommendation
• A debate prompt
• A narrative account

This document does not seek reform.
It records failure precisely so it cannot be redescribed later.

It is priced deliberately.
It is intended for readers who understand why enforcement must be bounded.