Former President Donald Trump has issued his 69th executive order during his second term, titled "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies." This significant directive aims to enhance transparency and accountability within federal agencies that operate with a degree of independence. However, critics are raising alarms, labeling the order a "bald power grab" that could pave the way for dictatorial governance.
The executive order seeks to place federal agencies under more direct oversight from the White House. It stipulates that the president—or the attorney general under the president's authority—will have the final say in interpreting laws for the executive branch. This provision has sparked intense debate, as many see it as a direct challenge to the foundational principles of democracy and the checks and balances outlined in the U.S. Constitution.
Critics argue that this move is a blatant advance of the so-called "unitary executive theory," which posits that the president's authority supersedes all other branches of government. This theory has been a point of contention among legal scholars and political analysts, who assert that it undermines the independence of regulatory agencies. Under the new order, agencies will lose their autonomy and be held accountable directly to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), led by Russell Vought, a figure known for his ties to conservative think tanks.
Joe Morelle, the top congressional Democrat on the committee on house administration, has denounced the order as an "unprecedented violation of American rule of law." Even some constitutional conservatives, who typically align with many of Trump’s policies, have expressed concerns. Gregg Nunziata, executive director of the Society for the Rule of Law, cautioned against the implications of the order.
"The law is what Congress passes and the Supreme Court interprets, and the president has an obligation to obey the law," said Nunziata.
He further emphasized that allowing the president to dictate legal interpretations could lead to significant overreach.
"The law is what the president says it is," he warned, noting that such authority would undermine the very fabric of American governance.
This executive order has been characterized by Frank Bowman, a legal scholar, as a conscious attempt by Trump to position himself as an elected dictator. He articulated concerns regarding the implications of this order.
"The essence of it is that Donald Trump is trying, quite consciously, to make himself an elected dictator," said Bowman.
He elaborated that the directive essentially declares that "the law is determined by my will, period," suggesting a chilling effect on dissent within federal agencies.
Bowman also expressed apprehensions about how this shift could affect independent agencies like the Federal Reserve, noting that Trump's potential disregard for their independence could destabilize financial markets.
"The reason plainly is that he is afraid that if he were to simply declare that the Federal Reserve is no longer independent, that would drive the markets crazy and risk a financial panic," he explained.
The growing concerns surrounding this executive order extend beyond partisan lines. Critics argue that it opens avenues for Trump to prioritize his political and business interests, favoring donors and allies at the expense of ethical governance.
Bowman further warned about the broader implications of allowing a president to dictate legal interpretations without accountability.
"That’s just crazy stuff because, in essence, what it’s saying is if the president wakes up one morning and says, 'I think all these statutes that criminalize bribery really shouldn’t apply to me, my family, my friends or executive branch officials at all,'…the Justice Department would have to adopt an interpretation of federal bribery laws that is completely at odds with their obvious meaning," he stated.
Furthermore, Bowman's insights into congressional dynamics raise additional concerns about checks and balances. He noted that Trump’s current relationship with Republican lawmakers has rendered them largely ineffective in challenging his executive overreach.
"The principal check against executive overreach is the power of Congress, but right now he has utterly squelched Republicans in Congress," he said.