Former President Donald Trump is rapidly expanding presidential authority, capitalising on shifting political dynamics in Congress and recent rulings from a conservative-leaning Supreme Court that have curbed judicial checks on the executive branch.
In what critics describe as an erosion of the U.S. Constitution’s foundational system of checks and balances, Republican lawmakers and conservative justices are increasingly deferring to Trump’s aggressive interpretation of presidential power.
Now back in office after winning the 2024 election, Trump is testing the limits of executive authority, aided by a Congress reluctant to assert its constitutional responsibilities and a judiciary more willing to reinterpret long-standing legal precedents.
Congress Retreats from Oversight
Under the Constitution, Congress holds the power to declare war and regulate international trade. But Republican lawmakers have largely endorsed Trump’s unilateral decisions, from launching airstrikes on Iran without prior congressional approval to unilaterally reshaping U.S. trade policy through tariffs.
House Speaker Mike Johnson has shown little concern over the White House withholding information from Congress, prioritising concerns about leaks over transparency. Meanwhile, Trump’s moves—such as abruptly halting trade talks with Canada—have gone largely unchecked by lawmakers.
Supreme Court Reins in Judicial Limits on Executive Power
This week, the Supreme Court narrowed the ability of lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions against presidential actions—rulings that have often delayed or blocked controversial executive orders in the past.
“This is a fundamental shift in the balance between the presidency and the courts,” said CNN legal analyst Elie Honig.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, argued that nationwide injunctions have no basis in U.S. legal tradition, referencing the English monarchy’s legal framework. The decision, while technical in nature, could allow Trump to proceed with sweeping changes—such as attempts to end birthright citizenship—without immediate judicial pushback.
Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson issued a stark warning in her dissent, calling the ruling a dangerous precedent that could fuel “executive lawlessness” and undermine the republic.
Immunity and the 14th Amendment in Question
The Court has also previously sided with Trump on presidential immunity, effectively halting his prosecution related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Trump has since used that decision to justify a broad interpretation of his powers, including issuing executive orders that clash with established constitutional protections.
At a recent White House event, Trump reiterated his controversial view of the 14th Amendment, claiming it was never intended to grant citizenship to the children of undocumented immigrants. “That was meant for the babies of slaves,” he said.
His remarks follow the Court’s refusal to directly rule on the matter, leaving open the possibility that Trump could unilaterally redefine key constitutional principles without legislation.
Expanding the Executive Agenda
With fewer legal barriers in place, Trump is now moving forward with a list of stalled priorities, including ending sanctuary city funding, suspending refugee resettlement, and halting federal coverage of gender-affirming care—all announced in a sweeping address from the White House.
Analysts warn that with Republican majorities in Congress and a compliant Court, the executive branch is absorbing powers that were once the domain of the legislative and judicial branches.
“If the Supreme Court gives him power,” Trump said Friday, “he’ll use it.”
