logo
We need a bipartisan Congress to check presidential power

We need a bipartisan Congress to check presidential power

The Hill09-05-2025
It is no coincidence that the first article of the U.S. Constitution, the one the Framers prioritized, defines the powers of Congress, not the president. The Framers assumed Congress would play the leading role under the new constitution, as it had through the Continental Congress and the Confederation Congress.
As Americans have witnessed since Jan. 20, the Framers assumed wrongly. And it is time to reassess what is best for the nation — the Framers' vision or the powers claimed by President Trump.
In the 20th century and early in the 21st century, Congress ceded more power to the presidency in areas such as budget creation, diplomacy, war powers and law enforcement. Popular support accompanied those changes, particularly during the 1930s, the 1960s and the early 2000s as Americans demanded presidents 'get things done.' The first 100 days standard gained popular currency, which forced presidents to act quickly. Additionally, media coverage centered on the person of the president rather than the Congress. The latter appeared as an amorphous blob. No one could speak for the whole Congress.
Disturbed by the excesses of the Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon administrations, Congress attempted to claw back some of its power through the War Powers Act, the Congressional Budget Act and the Impoundment Act. It also enacted the legislative veto that allowed Congress to override presidential actions, sometimes by doing nothing.
But presidential power began to grow, particularly as divided government became more common. Presidents began to rely on executive orders to enact policy that formerly had been Congress' purview in areas such as gun control.
Trump has taken presidential powers to another level entirely. He issued 26 executive orders on his first day. In his first hundred days, he signed 142. Plus, their scope is well beyond those of other presidents. They include gutting whole departments, cutting programs such as public television and public radio, ending DEI programs, authorizing massive immigrant deportation orders, and targeting individuals and corporations he felt harmed him. He has declared these orders are essential due to various national emergencies.
The Framers established three branches of government to separate power, but also to check power held by each branch. Presidential power is now out of balance in relation to the other two branches. The trend has been going in that direction for many years, but now, with a president who is anxious to use such power, the effects of that imbalance are glaringly apparent.
Some federal judges have checked presidential power by ruling that Trump's actions are unconstitutional or violate statutes. But the Trump administration is counting on the Supreme Court to back them up in most if not all the actions. However, the court may or may not do so, as indicated by its decision in the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case directing the administration to facilitate his return.
The question of whether to abide by the Supreme Court's decisions has rarely been a live one. But today it is, making many Americans wonder whether the judiciary will be an effective check on a rapacious president.
Congress could and should check the president. Some members of Congress are working on legislation to do so. Others should join. But it cannot be partisan. One such recent example of a partisan effort was the Federalist Society's Article I Project, which targeted checking Democratic presidents but has been silent about Republican ones.
Members of both parties need to come together to enact legislation that limits presidential powers regardless of who is president. The legislation should not be targeted at particular policies but at reining in presidential power generally to dictate economic policy, punish opponents or ignore congressional appropriations. Congressional Republicans would benefit since Congress would be checking a Democrat in the future and not just a Republican today.
Members of Congress swore to uphold the Constitution. Preserving constitutional checks and balances to maintain our democratic system is a large part of that obligation. It is time for Congress to restore the balance in the Constitution the Framers so carefully crafted for our benefit.
Richard Davis is a professor emeritus of political science at BYU.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Virginia Giuffre's family expresses shock over Trump saying Epstein 'stole' her
Virginia Giuffre's family expresses shock over Trump saying Epstein 'stole' her

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Virginia Giuffre's family expresses shock over Trump saying Epstein 'stole' her

The family of Virginia Giuffre, who was among Jeffrey Epstein's most well-known sex trafficking accusers, said that it was shocking to hear President Donald Trump say the disgraced financier 'stole' Giuffre from him and urged that Epstein's former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell remain in prison. Giuffre, who had accused Britain's Prince Andrew and other influential men of sexually exploiting her as a teenager trafficked by Epstein, has been a central figure in conspiracy theories tied to the case. She died by suicide this year. Her family's statement is the latest development involving Epstein, who took his own life in a New York jail in 2019 while facing federal sex trafficking charges, and the Republican president, who was his one-time friend. Trump denied prior knowledge of Epstein's crimes and said he cut off their relationship years ago, but he still faces questions about the case. Trump, responding to a reporter's question on Tuesday, said that he got upset with Epstein over his poaching of workers and that Epstein had stolen Giuffre from his Palm Beach, Florida, club. 'It was shocking to hear President Trump invoke our sister and say that he was aware that Virginia had been 'stolen' from Mar-a-Lago,' the family's statement said. 'We and the public are asking for answers; survivors deserve this,' it continued. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt noted the president was responding to a reporter's question and didn't bring up Giuffre himself. 'The fact remains that President Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club for being a creep to his female employees,' she said. The family's statement comes shortly after the Justice Department interviewed Maxwell, who was convicted in 2021 on sex trafficking and other charges and is serving a 20-year sentence in Tallahassee, Florida. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche interviewed Maxwell in a Florida courthouse, though details about what she said haven't become public. Maxwell's lawyers have said she testified truthfully and answered questions 'about 100 different people." They have said she's willing to answer more questions from Congress if she is granted immunity from future prosecution for her testimony and if lawmakers agree to satisfy other conditions. A message seeking comment about the Giuffre family's statement was sent to Maxwell's attorney Thursday. A Trump administration official said the president is not considering clemency action for Maxwell. Giuffre said she was approached by Maxwell in 2000 and eventually was hired by her as a masseuse for Epstein. But the couple effectively made her a sexual servant, she said, pressuring her into gratifying not only Epstein but his friends and associates. Giuffre said she was flown around the world for appointments with men including Prince Andrew while she was 17 and 18 years old. The men, including Andrew, denied it and assailed Giuffre's credibility. She acknowledged changing some key details of her account. The prince settled with Giuffre in 2022 for an undisclosed sum, agreeing to make a 'substantial donation' to her survivors' organization. The American-born Giuffre lived in Australia for years and became an advocate for sex trafficking survivors after emerging as a central figure in Epstein's prolonged downfall. Her family's statement said she endured death threats and financial ruin over her cooperation with authorities against Epstein and Maxwell.

Trump administration cancels plans to develop new offshore wind projects
Trump administration cancels plans to develop new offshore wind projects

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump administration cancels plans to develop new offshore wind projects

The Trump administration is canceling plans to use large areas of federal waters for new offshore wind development, the latest step to suppress the industry in the United States. More than 3.5 million acres had been designated wind energy areas, the offshore locations deemed most suitable for wind energy development. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is now rescinding all designated wind energy areas in federal waters, announcing on Wednesday an end to setting aside large areas for 'speculative wind development." Offshore wind lease sales were anticipated off the coasts of Texas, Louisiana, Maine, New York, California and Oregon, as well as in the central Atlantic. The Biden administration last year had announced a five-year schedule to lease federal offshore tracts for wind energy production. Trump began reversing the country's energy policies after taking office in January. A series of executive orders took aim at increasing oil, gas and coal production. The Republican president has been hostile to renewable energy, particularly offshore wind. One early executive order temporarily halted offshore wind lease sales in federal waters and paused the issuance of approvals, permits and loans for all wind projects. In trying to make a case against wind energy, he has relied on false and misleading claims about the use of wind power in the U.S. and around the world. The bureau said it was acting in accordance with Trump's action and an order by his interior secretary this week to end any preferential treatment toward wind and solar facilities, which were described as unreliable, foreign-controlled energy sources. Robin Shaffer, president of Protect Our Coast New Jersey, applauded the administration for its actions and said they were long overdue. Opponents of offshore wind projects are particularly vocal and well-organized in New Jersey. 'It's hard to believe these projects ever got this far because of the immensity, scale, scope and expense, compared to relatively cheap and reliable forms of onshore power,' he said Thursday. 'We're nearly there, but we haven't reached the finish line yet.' Attorneys general from 17 states and the District of Columbia are suing in federal court to challenge Trump's executive order halting leasing and permitting for wind energy projects. His administration had also halted work on a major offshore wind project for New York, but allowed it to resume in May. The nation's first commercial-scale offshore wind farm, a 12-turbine wind farm called South Fork, opened last year east of Montauk Point, New York. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at Jennifer Mcdermott, The Associated Press

Lula's approval rises amid tariff dispute with Trump, poll shows
Lula's approval rises amid tariff dispute with Trump, poll shows

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Lula's approval rises amid tariff dispute with Trump, poll shows

By Isabel Teles SAO PAULO (Reuters) -Approval for Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva exceeded disapproval for the first time in nine months, a poll showed on Thursday, against a backdrop of a growing dispute with Washington. Earlier in July, U.S. President Donald Trump said he would slap 50% tariffs on Brazilian exports to fight what he has called a "witch hunt" against Lula's right-wing rival, former President Jair Bolsonaro. Those tariffs were formalized on Thursday, albeit with some key sector exemptions. The Trump administration has also imposed sanctions and visa restrictions on the judge overseeing Bolsonaro's trial on charges of plotting a coup. Lula's government has pushed back, calling Trump an unwanted "emperor" and the sanctions "unacceptable." The AtlasIntel/Bloomberg poll showed 50.2% approval of Lula's performance, up from 49.7% in the previous poll two weeks ago and marking the first time he has scored greater approval than disapproval since October. The new poll adds to evidence that Trump's tactics may be backfiring in Brazil, rallying public support behind a defiant leftist government. The proportion of respondents who consider Lula's government good or great has also improved, now at 46.6% from 43.4%, although that is still below the 48.2% who consider it bad or awful. If a replay of the 2022 presidential election in Brazil was held this week, 47.8% of those surveyed would vote for Lula and 44.2% for Bolsonaro. Despite being barred from holding public office until 2030, Bolsonaro insists he could run again, while Lula has hinted that he could run for reelection. The poll surveyed 7,334 Brazilian adults online between July 25 and July 28. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus one percentage point.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store