Re: Over reaction?
The US will still have rule of law, and the various Houses and courts will continue to play their parts.
In theory, yes; but in recent years, the US has established a series of precedents and Catches-22 (?) that the feds routinely use to circumvent or ignore the Constitution. The schoolbooks say that we have laws and rights that are protected by checks and balances; but if the government as a whole chooses to ignore or abrogate them, what recourse is there?
Example: To challenge something in court in the US, you first have to prove that you have "standing;" i.e., that the action in question affects you, and that it has a potentially deleterious effect. Surveillance programs, watch lists, no-fly lists, data slurps, etc. are all highly classified and run under gag order. As a result, it's the rare person or organization that can prove standing. No standing, no legal challenge.
Example: Several laws grant extra-judicial powers and suspend habeas corpus in cases of "terrorism." Change the definition of terrorism to "actions in opposition to the government" and boom, free speech and due process are dim memories....things that we would like to tell our kids about, but won't dare to because of the secret surveillance. Remember, the word terrorism traces its roots to la terreur, which was a government program...
The UK is moving in the same direction; some would say that Blighty is at least as far down that road as the US. The Snooper's Charter, all-pervasive surveillance, "criminalized" photography, and other things that have been well-covered here in the Reg easily match or exceed the governmental paranoia in the US.