There are obviously many threads touching on aspects of this topic, but none focusing only on Trump's intentional testing of the constitutional waters with his various actions. As they say in the GARM . . . I.D.I.O.T. gift link: https://www.wsj.com/opinion/trumps-...4?st=ZSvQST&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink Trump’s Constitutional Cleanup The administration is courting lawsuits that could dismantle the Washington machine. By Kimberley A. Strassel Feb. 20, 2025 at 5:28 pm ET Franklin D. Roosevelt fundamentally redefined the purpose of the federal government, setting off an era of ever-expanding Washington scope and reach. Nearly a century later, Donald Trump’s White House is taking it on itself to challenge the legitimacy of some foundations of that expansion. The left calls this a constitutional crisis. How about a constitutional cleanup? The sheer volume of Mr. Trump’s actions can make it hard to distinguish between the merely aggressive and the truly striking. In the former category are the Department of Government Efficiency’s moves to cut the size of the federal workforce, change civil-service rules and eliminate wasteful spending. These moves are unconventional—most presidents roll with the bureaucracy they are given—but hardly lawless. Progressive litigators may soon discover presidents have a lot of authority to manage employees and programs. It’s the truly striking class that deserves note. This is the growing list of Trump actions deliberately designed to provoke a judicial review of the legality of longstanding Washington features. Congress spent a century creating dozens of agencies that blur the boundaries between executive, legislative and judicial power, while the administrative state produced thousands of rules that diverge from congressional intent. Constitutionalists have long disputed the legality of those actions, but over time even most critics succumbed to the status quo. To see the White House revive that fight—audaciously questioning the foundations of the D.C. architecture—is remarkable. Mr. Trump unveiled the latest zinger this week, detonating what the American Action Forum’s Daniel Goldbeck labeled a “thermonuke deregulatory warhead.” The president ordered agency heads to scour every regulation and bit of guidance under their remit and make lists of those that violate the constitution, exceed legislative power, go beyond the clear words of a statute or harm the national interest. The White House is laying the groundwork to declare hundreds of rules null and void on grounds that they weren’t lawful in the first place. Will it get sued? Yes, and the White House knows it. The clear hope is to build on recent Supreme Court rulings that rein in the bureaucratic state. The thermonuke followed a separate executive order taking aim at agencies that Congress created to perform executive functions (administer laws) yet left free of executive control. They instead report to Congress. These congressional minions—now numbering far more than 100—populate Washington, and many flex far bigger regulatory muscle than even cabinet departments. They include major agencies like the Federal Communications Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission and smaller outfits like the Election Assistance Commission and the African Development Foundation. Mr. Trump has ordered independent agencies to submit all proposed regulatory changes to the White House for review. Cue freak-out. Pair this with a separate order this week drastically reducing the function of a handful of smaller independent agencies, as well as his recent firing of National Labor Relations Board member Gwynne Wilcox (despite statutory restrictions on a president’s removal authority). The White House is actively courting a lawsuit that will ask courts to reconsider a 1935 ruling that upheld independent agencies. Ms. Wilcox has already sued. It also wants clarity on Congress’s 1978 law creating inspectors general—congressional watchdogs that sit within the executive branch and conduct investigations. This is a separation-of-powers nightmare, an issue Mr. Trump is raising with his decision to fire 17 inspectors general his first week in office. While the president has the undisputed power to remove inspectors general, Mr. Trump flouted Congress’s rule demanding he provide it 30-day notice. Eight of those dismissed have sued to be reinstated, what the White House surely expected. Watch now to see if Mr. Trump also flouts congressional strictures as to who he is allowed to name as replacements. Another fight that is likely coming: impoundment, or the presidential power to decline to spend full amounts appropriated by Congress. So far Mr. Trump has simply paused Biden-era spending. But he has argued that a 1970s law restricting a president’s impoundment power is unconstitutional, suggesting the administration may seek to tee up a lawsuit here, too. Note that what Mr. Trump is doing is very different than Barack Obama’s practice of ignoring inconvenient laws, or Joe Biden’s habit of searching through dusty statutes to find some contorted rationale for a new exercise of power. This administration hopes its actions will compel the judiciary to re-examine the constitutional underpinnings of today’s heaving federal infrastructure. Win or lose, the effort is long overdue. Vigorous debate over the powers and structure of government ought to be a feature of every administration. What should worry us isn’t that Mr. Trump is doing this now, but that our drowsy political system considers it an anomaly. Appeared in the February 21, 2025, print edition as 'Trump’s Constitutional Cleanup'.
UNITARY EXECUTIVE THEORY BABY So awesome if the president who will be involved in federal elections to have personal oversight of federal elections through the Federal Election Commission. This just makes sense. We welcome our new overlords
The more I think about unitary executive theory the more I realize that this is peak libertarianism. If you are a libertarian who cares about freedom to exploit humans and resources, a actual monarchy is the most efficient as it just takes having one man who also appreciates the magical feel you get when you exploit laborers to be head of the executive branch to just completely halt all regulatory aspects of society that prevent the enjoyment of exploiting labor. We finally get to see full American libertarianism implemented.
"Clean up"? These people want a Kaiser or some sort of autocratic ruler that controls every facet of their lives apparently.
I think I heard 3 major conservative media figures reference Trump coming back as "daddy coming home to do a spanking" A lot of daddy issues with that crowd.
It is just weird - it is a very similar sentiment and way of looking at leadership that still exists in Russia and used to exist in Germany around the turn of the 19th century.
@GOATuve , as someone with clear mental health issues, what are your thoughts on Trump as "daddy coming home to do a spanking"?
This op-ed is really poorly done. This one phrase alone has so many difficulties. The idea that Obama had a practice of simply ignoring inconvenient laws is meaningless and not accurate. Republicans would have loved to bust Obama for not following laws. They were't able. If there was an example of him doing that, it certainly wasn't a practice. Then the author is upset that Biden actually could support his actions with actual precedent and characterizes his actions as a new exercise of power. But the biggest issue is the idea that Trump is trying to restrain the 'heaving Federal Structure'. He isn't. .He's consolidating power into the executive branch, and trying to manipulate it to further bloat the part that enriches him and his cronies. Those are just the problems with that one little bit. The problems abound throughout this op-ed. It's quite weak.
Yes. GOP is a group of people who love to live in their box, not think outside of the box and don’t want their box messed with. Status quo, no rule breakers (innovators). Tell me what to do, pay me what you think I deserve, oh God-Emperor. I sin but it is acceptable sin; I have a mistress and my wife is on substances to dull the pain to a mild white noise. My children hate me but at least they respect me, by God, just I hated and respected my father and my b*stard half-brother he loved more than me.
It is funny to see Republicans basically plowing ahead full steam through Constitutional loopholes with this whole "make me stop" attitude. Contrasting that with Democrats who are afraid of their own shadow and actively seek reasons to not rock the boat. I guess we will see how far this unitary executive theory goes.
Judge temporarily blocks key parts of Trump’s executive orders targeting DEI The plaintiffs argued that the president’s edicts against diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives exceeded his authority and violate their constitutional right to due process. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/21/trump-dei-executive-order-blocked/ excerpt: A federal judge in Maryland temporarily blocked key portions of President Donald Trump’s executive orders targeting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in the federal government and corporate America. U.S. District Judge Adam B. Abelson granted a preliminary injunction on Friday that bars portions of Trump’s orders to cancel federal contracts with DEI components and require government contractors to certify that they do not engage in DEI practices that violate antidiscrimination laws. The order also prohibits enforcement against publicly traded companies and large universities with comparable policies. In reference to enforcement against companies and universities, Abelson noted that the plaintiffs were “likely” to succeed on their claim that such actions would violate constitutionally protected free speech. “That is textbook viewpoint-based discrimination,” Abelson wrote. “The government’s threat of enforcement is not just targeted towards enforcement of federal law. Rather, the provision expressly targets, and threatens, the expression of views supportive of equity, diversity and inclusion.” The lawsuit was brought by a coalition of diversity officers, professors and restaurant worker advocates. Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, a left-leaning nonprofit that filed the lawsuit on their behalf, said in a statement that the “Constitution protects all Americans — whether you are a university professor or a restaurant worker — from unlawful intrusion on speech, ideas, and expression and entitles all Americans to fair process.” “We are grateful for the court’s decision to pause these harmful Executive Orders while it takes a careful look at how the orders blatantly violate our Constitution,” Perryman added. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It typically does not comment on ongoing litigation. In the first days of his second term, Trump issued two executive orders meant to eviscerate DEI in the federal government and neutralize it in the private sector and higher education. The orders already have led to widespread purges of federal workers, while corporations and universities have grappled with how to interpret the orders that target “equity-related” government contracts and “illegal DEI.” The plaintiffs argued that such terms are poorly defined and violate the constitutional right to due process. They also allege that Trump exceeded his authority by ordering agencies to terminate all “equity-related” government grants and contracts because they had been funded by Congress. The plaintiffs also took aim at a provision in which government contractors and grantees must certify that they’re not engaging in DEI programs that violate antidiscrimination laws. The lawsuit contends that the provision, which threatens penalties under the False Claims Act, suppresses their free speech rights. more at the link
