President Trump is reworking his existing system of checks through orders, shootings and other changes. Supporters say that’s the point. Anna Money Maker/Getty Image hides captions
Toggle caption
Anna Money Maker/Getty Images
No one can say that he hadn’t been ahead of it.
“It’s good to have people in the country’s mind,” Donald Trump at the time declared at a New Hampshire Campaign rally in January 2024.
In a successful comeback bid, Trump praised Strongman’s leader throughout the campaign, vowing to uproot his administrative state and seek retaliation against his political enemy. And when asked in 2023 by Fox News host Sean Hannity to promise “not abuse power as retaliation against anyone,” he replied “with the exception of day one.”
“We’re closed our borders, we drill, we drill, we drill. After that, I’m not a dictator. I get it,” Trump continued.
Since he took office just seven weeks ago, the second president-elect has attempted to challenge the Department of Justice’s independence, challenge the public of independent inspectors in 18 federal agencies, effectively shut down watchdog institutions like the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, and try to get operational control like independent committees like committees. Oversees the election.
“We’re accused litigation and strategy at Campaign Legal Centre (CLC), the government’s watchdog group, said:
“With that being said, we fear that we shouldn’t see them as some sort of academic, legal debate or fight,” Malloy added. “This administration is trying to take control and power over the operation of the federal government in an unprecedented way.”
The CLC is particularly opposed to Trump’s attempts to fire Ellen Weintraub, chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). Independent bodies cannot simultaneously be neutral and fair enforcers of the law, Malloy said, and can only answer the president.
“I think we can see basic injustice. If, for example, the Biden administration exerts control of the FEC president, then turn the situation over, does President Trump think that his 2024 campaign feels a fair shake?
For more “energizing” executives
According to John Yu, a conservative legal scholar who worked for the Justice Department under President George W. Bush, Trump’s actions have caused confusion in the administrative department, but there are theories that tie it all together.
Before the Watergate scandal, American presidents enjoyed far less constraints on their power. After President Richard Nixon resigned in a scandal over his power abuse, Congress was under Democrat control at the time – over the years passed the law to constrain or check the president’s power to build a general role in serving in federal agencies to report on waste, misconduct and inefficiency, for example.
“We still live with those laws today, and it’s one way of understanding what Trump is trying to do, and I’m not saying Trump understands this is what he’s doing, but the presidency urges him to do that.
The idea, dubbed “Unitary Executive Theory,” has long been popular in far-right conservative circles and has been promoted in the Conservative Government Blueprint Project 2025, but is now being tested in real time by the Trump administration.
According to supporters like Yoo, the argument is that the constitution should place the power of the administrative division on one president, and as a result, the president should have the power to freely command the administrative body. In simplest terms, anyone can hire or fire a president.
“Now, it can of course be dangerous or dangerous, but I thought (founders) would outweigh the virtue of being able to act quickly, act fast, and act with decisions and capabilities,” Yoo said. “The famous Hamilton phrase used is that good government is defined by “executive energy.” And to gain that energy, one person needs to have strength. ”
Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller explained the administration’s views on Trump’s power at a February 20 press conference, discussing the cuts by White House adviser Elon Musk and cuttings on his government efficiency projects.
“The President is elected to the entire American people. He is the only official in the entire government elected by the nation. Right? A judge has been appointed. Members of Congress were elected at the district or state level. “And Article 2 of the Constitution has a clause known as a vesting clause, which is said to have “the right to enforce the President.” Singular form. The entire democratic will immerse itself in the elected president. The president then appoints staff to impose democratic will on the government. ”
He went on to describe the term civil servants who “believe they won’t answer anyone” as “a threat to democracy.”
Watchdog that sounds the alarm
Watchdog says Trump’s actions have a calm effect not only on government forces aimed at stopping corruption, but also on government officials remaining in these agencies, as well as government officials waiting to see what happens next.
“I don’t think it’s insignificant to protect whistleblowers and remove the heads of executives whose job is that corruption and fraud is an early target of the Trump administration. “All offices and laws established to prevent corruption and abuse of power are explicitly targeted and undermined.”
Scott Greytak, US advocacy director and anti-corruption lawyer and advocate for Transparency International, has been more measured.
“The multiple lights in the sky don’t necessarily mean there are constellations, and we want them to have no constellations, but in reality it’s too early to tell them,” he said. “I don’t think this comes from a coordinated government-wide bond of corruption. I don’t think I’m there yet. I think I’ll look into whether I’ll get there and I’ll know soon over the next six months.”
The Trump administration has also not yet issued executive orders that impose ethical guidelines on administrations and high-level political appointees – the presidents usually do – employ more billionaires in history than ministers with many economic conflicts before the government.
“I’m not saying there’s always corruption in the administration, but I’m saying it poses a much greater risk of having a look, because when that happens, the government is operating in the public interest.
Who asked for this
There is little evidence that the American people are seeking a stronger president.
If anything, voters seem to like the separation of power. Just six percent of Americans support an increase in presidential power, according to a 2024 poll by the Vanderbilt University Uniform Poll. The majority – 63% – were satisfied with the current situation.
Last month, a CNN poll showed a narrow majority of Americans at 52%, saying Trump went too far to exercise his presidential power. However, the second-term president is not bound by general political sentiment as he is forbidden to appear in the vote again (although he repeatedly raised the idea that Trump can challenge the constitutional limits of a presidential two terms).
For now, Trump’s power checks have been conducted in federal courts, with over 100 cases challenging his enforcement actions.
However, the courts have moved slowly, and Trump has not steered away from criticizing judges. His advisor, businessman Elon Musk, has also not publicly called on some judges to face each for rulings that delayed or stopped Trump’s efforts to remake the federal government.
What is in danger?
Many lawsuits challenging the Trump administration’s actions have passed through federal courts, but Yu said it is part of Trump’s strategy.
“Trump is clearly setting up a test case to return to the Supreme Court,” Yoo said. He said it is likely to issue a 1935 Supreme Court ruling restricting the president’s authority to eliminate certain officials serving in the administrative department. The 6-3 conservative court is a kinder place for Trump to go into that legal battle, and the courts have been sympathetic to these arguments in recent years.
In 2020, the court ruled that the president had the authority to fire the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. “It appears Trump is keeping his eye on the Supreme Court’s call to test whether any of these independent bodies can remain within the framework of the 18th century constitution,” Yu said.
The Supreme Court has already handed President Trump almost absolute power over the Justice Department in its 2024 ruling on the president’s immunity, including his ability to have conversations about criminal cases and other enforcement actions.
If Trump succeeds in breaking all or part of the detention that had been imposed on the president in the post-water era, it marks a new era of American politics with little or no independent checks of the president and politicized institutions.
Accountability could still come in two forms: the ballot box and the other branches of the government. Voters can drive out unpopular presidents, and Congress can still hold back the law to pass the law and exercise their ammo each powers to eliminate the president.
That may be true for future presidents, but Trump as second-term president is not influenced by public opinion, and Congress, ruled by the same parties as the president, hopes to acquiesce the enforcer’s demands.
Yoo admitted that expanding executive power is not the advantage of one party.
“Previously after World War II, Democrats were once a favorite to unify executives after FDR and Truman, Kennedy and LBJ, and it was Republicans like Taft who opposed it,” he said. “So I don’t think that’s really Republican democratic. These reforms will eventually endure the interests of the Democratic president one day.”
