Under the false pretense of saving the nation from adversity, former President Donald Trump seemingly stretched the scope of his power beyond acceptable norms. He unhesitatingly employed commands typically reserved for crisis situations like imposing fierce import charges, deploying military at borders and conveniently discarding environmental laws. One such instance involved the dispatch of National Guard troops in Los Angeles, under an alleged attempt to extinguish protests against deportations pursued by federal immigration authorities.
In a surprising markup from his predecessors, around 30 out of 150 directives by Trump referred to unprecedented or special powers. This is a concerning shift, where a president defines his own capability, not in the face of unexpected catastrophe, but rather to undermine the power of Congress and push his personal agenda. Even as the Constitution grants Congress the authority to set trade policy, certain businesses won verdicts from a federal trade court claiming Trump exceeded his jurisdiction by enforcing tariffs under a self-declared economic crisis.
An appeals court has temporarily halted the ruling to allow for further examination, hinting at a potential challenge against Trump’s unique interpretation of presidential power. It’s increasingly evident that Trump has ventured beyond his limits, employing emergency regulations in times when America is not gripped by imminent threats, tarnishing the purpose of these laws. Congressional representative Don Bacon, a Republican from Nebraska, voiced his concerns and believed that the courts would finally overrule Trump’s self-serving effort to mold trade policies.
But the White House reacted dismissively to these concerns, brushing them off by defending Trump’s reckless misuse of his powers. The most abused emergency power was the invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act or IEEPA. Trump repeatedly leveraged this act to impose import duties, ignoring the fact that this law, enacted in 1977, sought to restrict presidential authority and was only intended for extreme external risks to United States’ national security, foreign policy or economy.
Pilfering through executive rules generated since 2001, it is shocking to discover that Trump invoked this law 21 times in his presidential mandates and memos. Not only did he stretch the use of IEEPA, but he also used the Alien and Sedition Act, a law from the 18th century, to justify the expulsion of Venezuelan migrants. Trump’s ill-considered use of this law was on the vague pretext of Venezuelan government’s supposed affiliation with the Tren de Aragua gang, a conclusion even intelligence officials weren’t able to corroborate.
Over the years, Congress has granted emergency powers to the president, recognizing that the executive branch might need to act swiftly during a disaster. They have access to 150 legal powers, including waiving a plethora of actions Congress has largely forbidden, but only after declaring a state of emergency. For instance, the administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new medicines, gain control over the transport system, or even bypass bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on humans in critical scenarios.
However, misusing emergency powers does not have a clear partisan line, both Democrats and Republicans have dared to push the boundaries. A president, in a bid to discard federal student loan debt, exploited a post-9/11 law empowering education secretaries to minimize or obliterate such debts during a national crisis. The Supreme Court eventually rejected this reckless attempt, forcing the president to seek alternative ways to attain his objectives.
Earlier, there are records of presidents engaging in warrantless domestic wiretapping and ordering civilian detention in camps during significant conflicts. Not to be left behind, Trump in his first tenure, instigated a substantial conflict with the Capitol Hill by foolishly declaring a national emergency to enforce the construction of a border wall. Despite Congress voting to annul his emergency declaration, it lacked sufficient support to overcome the subsequent veto. Filling the political void with emergency powers is not a reactionary move to unexpected challenges as a legal expert explained it.
Trump’s audacious moves have received backing from his followers, particularly right-wing legal allies. These vociferous supporters claim that Trump’s actions were entirely justified, while essentially creating an emergency out of thin air. Efforts to curb a president’s emergency powers were initiated by both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. Recently, legislators from both parties proposed a bill that would automatically end presidentially-declared emergencies after 30 days, unless endorsed by Congress. Unfortunately, their legislative attempt failed.
Regrettably, no such legislative measures have been put forth since Trump’s term. Currently, the process is inversely structured, requiring Congress to vote to nullify an emergency. As one senator, who co-sponsored an emergency powers reform bill, eloquently stated, Trump’s reckless behavior showed just how necessary it is for Congress to provide oversight and safeguards.
Across history, leaders who incessantly justify their actions through emergency declarations often nudge their countries towards an oppressive regime. This is an alarming trend and a threat to the democracy we hold dear. It is crucial that we draw on the lessons from the past and maintain a keen eye on any potential misuse of power by national leaders.