A few weeks ago, more “No Kings” rallies were conducted across the country. Participants were protesting what they considered the excessive use of executive power by President Trump. And King Charles’s assertion, in his remarks before Congress, that “executive power is subject to checks and balances,” drew thunderous applause, especially from Democrats, and has been interpreted as a rebuke to Trump. But those who disapprove of Trump’s use of power need to understand that modern presidents exercise more power than provided for in the Constitution because not only Congress but We the People have allowed them to do so. In essence, if we have Kings, we are the Kingmakers.
Our Constitution says that the President of the United States is to wield executive power, but within a framework of checks and balances to be exercised by Congress. For example:
- The Congress, not the president, creates and determines which departments are to comprise the executive branch of government, and what relationship they will have to the president.
- The President may appoint other executives and judges, but usually they must be confirmed by the Senate (some officials, such as the President’s Chief of Staff, National Security Advisor, and other officials working especially close to him, may be appointed without Senate confirmation, but those concerned with economics and budgeting now require Senate confirmation). Both houses of Congress, through the legislative process, may determine under what circumstances, if any, the President can fire others in the executive branch.
- The President is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, but Congress decides, through legislation, which armed forces we’ll have, as well as their size, missions, budgets, and organizational structure. The president may appoint the armed forces’ civilian and military leaders, but subject to Senate confirmation. And the Congress has sole power to declare war.
- The President may negotiate treaties, but they must be approved by the Senate to go into effect.
- The President may recommend legislation he wants, and veto legislation passed by Congress which he does not want. But if Congress overrides his veto of a particular bill, he must accept it as law and enforce it, whether he likes it or not.
- The Congress can impeach and remove the President, but he cannot impeach and remove the Congress.
But although the wording of the sections of the Constitution outlining presidential power has never been changed, the president’s actual powers have grown beyond what the Constitution’s writers may have imagined or wanted. For example, many modern presidents present comprehensive legislative programs to which Congress is expected to respond—The Square Deal of Theodore Roosevelt, the New Freedom of Woodrow Wilson, the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, the Fair Deal of Harry Truman, the New Frontier of John F. Kennedy, and the Great Society of Lyndon Johnson. This approach differs greatly from the custom in the 1800s when members of Congress were expected to take greater initiative in proposing and passing legislation, with presidents—especially Whig and Republican presidents—passively accepting what Congress passed (Democratic presidents normally played a more active role in the legislative process by using the veto to block what they disliked, but not by presenting their own ideas). But as American society grew larger, more diverse, and more industrialized after the Civil War, the public began to look more to the president for leadership, and presidents, especially but not exclusively Democrats, were happy to accommodate them.
And with the expansion of the power of the president to present legislative programs to which the Congress must respond has come the custom of presidents trying to make specific policies on their own and without congressional input, even though the Constitution says public policies are to be made by Congress through the legislative process. For example, President Obama, after denying that he had the power to do so, nonetheless created, through executive order, DACA policies to protect illegal immigrants brought here as children. President Biden unilaterally tried to cancel student loan debt. And President Trump has unilaterally imposed tariffs. The Constitution says that policies concerning immigration, spending, and taxes are to be determined by Congress, and not by the President acting alone.
More ominously, however, has been the growth of presidential war making power. Those who wrote the Constitution always believed that if America were attacked, the President need not wait for a congressional war declaration to repel the immediate attack. But more and more frequently, especially in the 20th century, Presidents have ordered full scale wars without prior congressional approval—our wars in Korea, Vietnam, and now Iran are the results.
Whether this is good or bad is debatable. One can argue that our world today, with the proliferation of nuclear weapons, is far more dangerous than the world of 1789, and therefore the president must have far more power to act than those who wrote our Constitution could imagine. Such are the points made by presidents who’ve expanded their war making powers.
But two points are not debatable:
- Each president who presents a legislative program or unilaterally establishes, or tries to establish, a policy assigned to Congress, or launches a war without Congressional approval, is building on precedents established by his predecessors, especially those who sought more power to meet the challenges of the 20th century. Whether one approves or disapproves of President Trump, he is not creating new precedents but building on and strengthening existing precedents in his use of power. For example, when in a previous column I criticized his launching of the war in Iran without previously consulting Congress, his supporters among my readers immediately said, “What about Clinton?” “What about Obama?” To which one could add, at the very least, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon as Trump’s role models in this instance.
- Almost every president who has set or strengthened a precedent which Trump has exploited, and every member of Congress who has passively let Trump (or Obama, or Biden) do so, was elected by We the People. We chose them. We put them in office.
As long as We the People want, or at least accept, strong presidential leadership, we’ll elect presidents who’ll govern in accordance with the precedents already establishing expanded presidential power, while testing the boundaries set by the precedents, and perhaps trying to get away with more. We may be able to limit, although probably not reverse, this trend if we were to look more to Congress or the state governments for effective problem solving. But for the time being, we must acknowledge that if our presidents are kings, and members of Congress accept their kingships, then We the People, by having put them in office while demanding or at least tolerating their expansion of presidential powers, are their kingmakers.
Malcolm L. Cross has lived in Stephenville since 1987 and taught politics and government at Tarleton for 36 years, retiring in 2023. His political and civic activities include service on the Stephenville City Council (2000-2014) and on the Erath County Republican Executive Committee (1990-2024). He was Mayor pro-tem of Stephenville from 2008 to 2014. He has served on the Board of Directors of the Stephenville
Economic Development Authority since 2018, and as chair of the Erath County Appraisal District’s Appraisal Review Board since 2015. He is also a member of the Stephenville Rotary Club, the Board of Vestry of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, and the Executive Committee of the Boy Scouts’ Pecan Valley District. Views expressed in this column are his and do not reflect those of The Flash as a whole.
Be the first to comment