logo
America's famed ‘checks-and-balances' governance system is failing

America's famed ‘checks-and-balances' governance system is failing

The Guardian16-07-2025
It has been said many times, but saying it appears to have no consequences: our system of checks and balances is failing. The US supreme court allowing the president effectively to abolish the Department of Education only reinforces this sense; Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, explicitly wrote that 'the threat to our Constitution's separation of powers is grave' – but she did not explain how to counter the threat.
The picture is complicated by the fact that what critics call 'the stranglehold the checks and balances narrative on the American political imagination' has prevented positive democratic change. Hence it is crucial to understand where the separation of powers itself needs to be kept in check and where it can play a democracy-reinforcing role. Most important, we need counterstrategies against the Trumpists' usurpation of what should remain separate powers.
While pious talk of the founders' genius in establishing 'checks and balances' is part of US civil religion and constitutional folklore, the system in fact never functioned quite as intended. The framers had assumed that individuals would jealously guard the rights of the branches they occupied. Instead, the very thing that the founders dreaded as dangerous 'factions' – what we call political parties – emerged already by the end of the 18th century; and thereby also arose the possibility of unified party government.
The other unexpected development was the increasing power of the presidency; the founders had always seen the legislature as the potential source of tyranny; instead, the second half of the 20th century saw the consolidation of an 'imperial presidency', whose powers have steadily increased as a result of various real (and often imagined) emergencies. Some jurists even blessed this development, going back to Hamilton's call for an energetic executive, and trusting that public opinion, rather than Congress or the courts, would prove an effective check on an otherwise 'unbound executive'.
The dangers posed by unified party control and a strong presidency were long mitigated by the relative heterogeneity of parties in the US; internal dissent meant that Congress would often thwart an executive's agenda. Less obviously, Congress's creation of largely independent agencies, acting on the basis of expertise, as well as inspectors general within the executive itself established an internal system of checks. It also remains true, though, that, compared with democracies such as Germany and the UK, an opposition party in the US does not have many rights (such as chairing committees) or ways of holding a chief executive accountable (just imagine if Trump had to face a weekly prime minister's question time, rather than sycophantic Fox hosts).
Most important, though, the executive itself tended to respect the powers of other branches. But Trump: not so much. In line with his governance model, of doing something plainly illegal and then seeing what happens, Trump is usurping powers reserved for the legislature. He uses money as he sees fit, not as Congress intended; he, not Congress, decides which departments are necessary. The tariff madness could be over if Congress called the bluff on a supposed 'emergency' which justifies Trump's capricious conduct of slapping countries with apparently random levies. The most egregious example is his recent threat vis-à-vis Brazil which has nothing to with trade deficits, but is meant to help his ideological ally, former president Jair Bolsonaro, escape a criminal trial for a coup attempt.
Trump is also destroying the internal checks within the executive. Inspectors general have been fired; independent agencies are made subservient to the president – in line with the theory of a 'unified executive' long promoted by conservative jurists. The US supreme court, occupied to 67% by Maga has been blessing every power grab. As the legal scholar Steve Vladeck noted, the court has granted Trump relief in every single emergency application since early April, with seven decisions – like this week's on the Department of Education – coming with no explanation at all. If this were happening in other countries, one would plainly speak of a captured court, that is to say: one subordinated to the governing party. As commentators have pointed out, it is inconceivable that this court would simply rubber-stamp a decision by a President Mamdani to fire almost everyone at the Department of Homeland Security.
Still, the main culprit is the Republican party in Congress. There is simply no credible version of 'conservatism' that justifies Trump's total concentration of power; and anyone with an ounce of understanding of the constitution would recognize the daily violations. This case can be made without buying into the separation of powers narrative criticized by the left (though what they aim at is less the existence of checks as such, but the empowerment of rural minorities in the Senate and the proliferation of veto points in the political system, such that powerful private interests can stop popular legislation).
Paradoxically, Democrats should probably make Congress even more dysfunctional than it already is: use every procedural means to grind business to a halt and explain to the public that – completely contrary to the founders' anxieties – the emasculation of the legislature is causing democracy's demise (it never hurts to slip in such gendered language to provoke the Republican masculinists).
Of course, one might question what role public opinion can really play as a check, and whether there's still such a thing at all given our fragmented media world: it never constrained the George W Bush administration's 'global war on terror' in the way that Hamilton's self-declared disciples had hoped. But it's still the best bet. After all, there is a reason why some jurists see 'we the people' as the fourth branch that ultimately makes the difference.
Jan-Werner Müller is a Guardian US columnist and a professor of politics at Princeton University
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US prepares to allow limited oil operations in Venezuela, starting with Chevron, sources say
US prepares to allow limited oil operations in Venezuela, starting with Chevron, sources say

Reuters

time14 hours ago

  • Reuters

US prepares to allow limited oil operations in Venezuela, starting with Chevron, sources say

HOUSTON/WASHINGTON, July 24 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is preparing to grant new authorizations to key partners of Venezuela's state-run PDVSA, starting with Chevron (CVX.N), opens new tab, which would allow them to operate with limitations in the sanctioned OPEC nation and swap oil, five sources close to the matter said on Thursday. If granted, the authorizations to the U.S. oil major, and possibly also to PDVSA's European partners, would mark a policy shift from a pressure strategy Washington adopted earlier this year on Venezuela's energy industry, which has been under U.S. sanctions since 2019. The U.S. might now allow the energy companies to pay oilfield contractors and make necessary imports to secure operational continuity. Some imports could be swapped for Venezuelan oil, as authorized in previous licenses, three of the sources said. A senior State Department official said in a statement they could not speak about any specific licenses to PDVSA's partners, but added the U.S. would not allow President Nicolas Maduro's government to profit from the sale of oil. "Chevron conducts its business globally in compliance with laws and regulations applicable to its business, as well as the sanctions frameworks provided for by the U.S. government, including in Venezuela," a company spokesperson said. Chevron shares touched $155.93 on Thursday, their highest level since April 3, according to LSEG data. Though Venezuela and the U.S. conducted a prisoner swap this month, relations between the two countries have been tense for years, and the Trump administration has publicly supported opposition leaders who say their candidate won last year's election, not Maduro. Trump in February announced the cancellation of a handful of energy licenses in Venezuela, including Chevron's, and gave until late May to wind down all transactions. The move left all operations in oil and gas joint ventures with Chevron and other partners in PDVSA's hands, but the companies were authorized to preserve their stakes and output remained almost unchanged. The U.S. State Department, which in May blocked a move by special presidential envoy Richard Grenell to extend the licenses, is this time imposing conditions to any authorization modifications, so that no cash reaches Maduro's coffers, the three sources said. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is not expected this time to ban the authorizations, but is negotiating their scope, they added. It was not immediately clear if the terms of the license that could be granted to Chevron would be reproduced for other foreign companies in Venezuela, including Italy's Eni ( opens new tab and Spain Repsol ( opens new tab, which have been asking the U.S. to allow them to swap fuel supplies for Venezuelan oil. The authorizations might remain private, one of the sources said. The U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control and PDVSA did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Following the cancellation of Chevron's license earlier this year, Trump announced the imposition of secondary tariffs on buyers of Venezuelan oil. But the measure, expected to severely hit Venezuela's main crude buyer China, has not been enforced, allowing the South American country to divert to Asia crude grades that were previously sold to U.S. and European refiners through PDVSA's joint-venture partners. The reshuffle, which has maintained Venezuela's oil output and exports close to the levels they were at before the license cancellations, has been criticized by politicians in Washington and was discussed as part of talks for the new authorizations, the sources said. During former U.S. President Joe Biden's administration, targeted licenses to PDVSA's partners allowed Western refiners to regain access to Venezuelan supplies, but they also granted a stable source of cash to Maduro's administration as the companies were required by Venezuela to pay royalties and taxes.

Massive spike in threats against Obama after Trump team claims he committed ‘treason'
Massive spike in threats against Obama after Trump team claims he committed ‘treason'

The Independent

time16 hours ago

  • The Independent

Massive spike in threats against Obama after Trump team claims he committed ‘treason'

Threats made online against former president Barack Obama spiked over the weekend after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accused him of a years-long coup attempt against President Donald Trump. Gabbard has claimed Obama and his top officials ran a 'treasonous conspiracy' by insinuating they manufactured an investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election to undermine Trump's first election. Hours after she made the claim, on July 18, violent rhetoric about Obama surged on platforms such as Truth Social, Telegram, and Gab, with some calling for his arrest, imprisonment, and execution. That rhetoric was intensified after the president posted an artificial intelligence-generated video of Obama being arrested and continued to re-post Gabbard's claims throughout the weekend. By July 19, threatening comments targeting Obama rose from three to 56 – a more than 1,700 percent increase, according to the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism. Truth Social users posted rhetoric calling for a 'firing squad,' a 'public hanging,' and 'streaming' his execution live – all while decrying Obama for the alleged treason. One user called for Obama's execution by using memes of a guillotine, electric shock chair, and public hanging platform. For years, Trump has blamed Obama and other Democrats for abusing power to facilitate investigations or indictments into himself. Since taking back the White House, Trump has promised to conduct a campaign of retribution against those he believes have targeted him. The documents Gabbard referred to as evidence of Obama's meddling show that the Obama administration wanted a review of the allegations against Russia before leaving office and pressured intelligence agencies to work quickly. spokesperson for Obama denied Gabbard's allegations, calling them 'bizarre,' 'ridiculous,' and 'a weak attempt at distraction. The Independent has asked the White House for comment. The Global Project Against Hate and Extremism said similar violent rhetoric increased on Gab, a platform known for platforming right-wing extremists. Between July 17 and July 20, comments targeted Obama as treasonous and deserving punishment rose from nine to 48, a more than 400 percent increase. A review of targeted comments made on Telegram in the same timeline revealed that threats against Obama rose from zero to 12. A White House spokesperson told Newsweek that, "President Trump and the entire administration strongly condemn all forms of violence. The Trump administration also believes in accountability and that individuals who participate in criminal activity should be held to the fullest extent of the law.

Trump fires back at reports he's trying to destroy Musk's companies
Trump fires back at reports he's trying to destroy Musk's companies

Daily Mail​

time16 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

Trump fires back at reports he's trying to destroy Musk's companies

President Donald Trump shot back at reports that he will try to destroy the companies of former best friend Elon Musk, clarifying his intent when it comes to the world's richest man. Trump had previously threatened to take away the billions in government contracts that Musk's various companies hold. The duo had a very public fallout over Trump's one big beautiful bill, which resulted in each man making threats against the other But the president now says he wants Musk to 'thrive.' 'Everyone is stating that I will destroy Elon's companies by taking away some, if not all, of the large scale subsidies he receives from the U.S. Government. This is not so!,' the president wrote on Truth Social. 'I want Elon, and all businesses within our Country, to THRIVE, in fact, THRIVE like never before! The better they do, the better the USA does, and that's good for all of us,' Trump wrote. The clarification came after White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked in her briefing on Wednesday if Trump supports federal agencies contracting with Musk's artificial intelligence company, xAI. 'I don't think so, no,' she replied and then added she would speak to the president about the matter. xAI won a contract for up to $200 million with the Department of Defense, alongside Anthropic, Google and OpenAI, last week. Additionally, this week, xAI unveiled a suite of products for U.S. government customers, which it refers to as Grok for Government. Trump and Musk have had a hot and cold relationship since the Tesla founder left government service in May. After his departure, Musk publicly turned on Trump's signature bill, complaining it would increase the country's debt and undo much of the savings his Department of Government Efficiency had sought. Trump was furious at Musk's public criticism and, at one point, responded: 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts.' 'We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon,' Trump added. Musk, for his part, threatened to start a third political party to go after Republican candidates and posted on his X account that the reason the Jeffrey Epstein files hadn't been released because Trump is in them. He later took that post down.

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