Is Trump's Use of Executive Orders an Overreach or Efficient Governance?
The Impact and Legality of President Trump's Executive Actions Compared to Historical Precedents
Is President Donald Trump doing too much too fast via Executive Order (EO) instead of going through Congress? This was a question posed at a Meetup group that I lead. The overall consensus was ‘yes’ — even by conservatives. While many are cheering for the issues he is working to fix, they are worried that he will be seen as more of a “dictator” with this initial bypass of Congress. Thankfully, we have a judicial arm of our federal government as oversight should we experience an overzealous president.
But ruling via EO is nothing new; after all, Franklin D. Roosevelt issued the most of any other president, issuing nearly 4,000 during his term. So, while not a constitutional crisis, it is effective and legal. Though, at this point Trump will exceed Obama’s large number of executive orders, which was highly criticized by conservatives of the time.
Article II of the U.S. Constitution grants the president executive powers. The Supreme Court upheld this power in 1952, stating, “The President’s power, if any, to issue the order must stem either from an act of Congress or the Constitution itself.”
Yet, this is what the people knew would happen when Trump got back into office, as he said there would be a blitz of EOs going out. This was and is Trump’s strategy to go fast and hard to change the mistakes of the past. While some of Trump’s EOs and other presidential actions will be successfully challenged through the courts, some will be completely legal and constitutional. This is not to say that legislation passed by Congress would pass constitutional muster either. Plenty of laws passed by Congress and signed by presidents get overturned as being unconstitutional.
