Political PT

When I hear this phrase in my head, it’s said by someone with a rich bass voice and an English accent. I’m right to give her the pageantry she deserves, but the accent is a bit misleading. She’s SO American. The old-world tone just gives it that extra pearl-clutchy edge.

I’ve always felt like I had a good idea of what an executive order is. Did I know many facts about it? No. But did it give off serious vibes? Yes. Unfortunately, no matter how hard I try, making a case for something based on vibes alone never works. If vibes don’t help me understand the stock market, then they sure as hell aren’t going to help me understand the roles and responsibilities of the highest office in the land. How did I expect to philosophically dunk on my extended family at holidays in such an uneducated state!? I also wanted to know how heavily I should weigh such orders when I hear about them in the press.

Just as mine, your poor eyeballs have probably been assaulted every time you look at your phone by headlines about EOs. From pulling out of the World Health Organization to “restoring biological truth,” it’s evident that the current administration is trying to make some changes in the world of healthcare. So come along, and let’s turn these vibes into vendettas. Socially compassionate, theoretical vendettas, of course.

TL;DR: You can watch this video, but if you read along, I’ll discuss some of the nuances and real-life implications. Let’s start with the basic structure of the executive branch. The president is the manager of this branch, and under them are the vice president, appointed cabinet members, and federal agencies. Cabinet members are nominated by the president, reviewed and confirmed by Congress, and serve as the heads of the federal agencies. Federal agencies are all those “Department of …” organizations, and they are each run by their respective “Secretary of …” The role of the executive branch is to enforce the laws passed by Congress.

So the laws dictate how departments carry out their business, and the president is supposed to work with and manage how all of those secretaries get their jobs done. If there are any discrepancies about what the laws actually mean, the judicial branch gets involved because their job is to interpret the law. The whole thing sounds cute and fair, right? It’s checks and balances, baby. It’s working together with distinct roles and responsibilities. Just imagine how hard this idea went at the Constitutional Convention. If I were James Madison, I’d never shut up about it.

Sometimes a president feels really strongly about how a federal agency should operate, and they can order said agency to act in a certain way by writing an executive order. The order can range from how they run their policies and procedures to immediate action for emergency situations.

The most famous executive order that I didn’t even know was an executive order was Honest Abe’s Emancipation Proclamation. It ordered the armed forces to enforce the freeing of slaves. Fun fact (or not so fun fact?): Only Confederate slaves were freed by the Emancipation Proclamation, and it was based on the fact that doing so would weaken the Confederacy’s infrastructure so much that they would lose the Civil War.

So, it appears we’re starting to slide a bit from checks and balances utopia toward mild authoritarianism. Don’t worry. Jimmy, George, Alex, and Ben had far too much trauma from being told to pay their taxes not to see how executive orders could undo all of their hard work if the wrong guy was elected. They made sure that if a president gives an executive order that seems sketchy, the Supreme Court or Congress could shut it down. PHEW!

If the Supreme Court thinks the president’s EO is overstepping the meaning of the law, they can review the order and make a ruling on whether or not it violates the rules. The Supreme Court can choose to take these reviews up on its own, or entities can sue at the federal level to force the Supreme Court to look at it and decide whether or not to strike it down.

If Congress feels that a president is overreaching, they can pass a bill to nullify it. Since it’s just a bill in Congress, the president can still veto it, just like any other bill that comes across the Resolute Desk. Congress can punch back and override that veto, but in order to do that, they need a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate. That type of majority is known as a supermajority, and if that word either turns you on or scares you, I recommend checking out my article about the filibuster. You’ll find that, like most romantic pursuits, it’s less sexy and mysterious and more frustrating than you anticipated. But at least you’ll have more data points than you did before.

Okay, so just like our fourth-grade teachers preached, it does, in fact, seem that the Founding Fathers were genius gods because of the checks and balances, right? I’d agree that the historical framework certainly helps guard against a dictatorship, but, similar to the tights and wigs, it hasn’t aged super well.

Maybe the Founding Fathers thought that anybody elected to be president would be of sound enough mind to question their own opinion if two-thirds of the representatives for the entire country disagreed with them. Turns out 80-year-old men still can’t take constructive criticism, even after 200 years. It’s cool, George. You couldn’t have possibly gotten everything right, no matter what my racist civics teacher thought.

So the real problem is that nowadays, since Congress is so closely divided along party lines, it’s impossible to get two-thirds of them to agree on anything. They are afraid of what will happen if they stray from the opinion of the rest of their respective party. They see the opposite side as an enemy with whom it is not worth compromising, even if that means the president overreaches and goes unchecked.

A similar vibe is happening over in the judicial branch. More political polarization means some of the judges have opinions that align more with the person who appointed them (the president) than they do with the rule of law.

And these decisions are made at the expense of whom? Oh, just 3.5 million people who call the United States home. No biggie.

I’m gonna be honest. That last paragraph was my own hypothetical I came up with while reading about how the government works and thinking about what’s currently going on in politics. It was a hunch until I started researching to see if any recent presidents had actually finessed the other branches to push an EO through.

I nearly fell off my chair when I connected the dots. It was like one of those things that I knew but didn’t actually know until I started reading about how sh*t works. Executive order is how he built the f*cking wall. He signed an EO saying, “Yo, build the wall.” Congress came back with a resolution from both parties saying, “Bro, you can’t do this. We’re the ones who get to decide where federal funding, i.e., America’s tax dollars, get spent.” He said, “F*ck that, I’m right,” and vetoed it. Congress couldn’t get two-thirds support to block his veto. Fifty-four voted in favor of overturning the veto, and 41 voted against it. Thus, the wall. God, that supermajority still has me all f*cked up.

Alright, the executive order may actually be worthy of the lofty presentation I give it in my head. Grandiose, flimsy, dangerous. A metaphor for so many things in life.

Anywho, hope this helped. Sources below, and as always, hit up my inbox with topic requests on the main page. Think I got something wrong? Send me a fact-check, and we’ll see what we can do.

The role of the Executive Branch and the President’s authority to issue executive orders:

• U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2-3: Gives the president authority to manage the executive branch, appoint officials, and ensure that laws are faithfully executed.
• Source: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

The historical example of the Emancipation Proclamation as an executive order:

• National Archives: The Emancipation Proclamation is listed as an executive order issued by Abraham Lincoln.
• Source: https://www.archives.gov/exhibits/american_originals/emancipation.html

The checks and balances system regarding executive orders, particularly with the role of the Supreme Court and Congress:

• U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2 and Article I: The president’s powers are balanced by the ability of the judicial and legislative branches to check executive actions.
• Source (Supreme Court checks on EOs): https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/ExecutiveOrders.pdf
• Source (Congress’s role in veto override): https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/roles-of-congress

The difficulty of achieving a supermajority in Congress due to political polarization:

• Brookings Institution: Research on contemporary political polarization in the U.S. shows that achieving a 2/3 majority for overriding a veto has become more challenging due to extreme partisan divides.
• Source: https://www.brookings.edu/research/partisan-polarization-in-the-united-states/

The use of executive orders to bypass Congress, specifically regarding the border wall:

• CNBC: The Trump administration used an executive order to push the construction of the border wall, which Congress attempted to block through a resolution. The president vetoed the resolution, and Congress failed to override the veto with a 2/3 majority.
• Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/15/trump-declares-national-emergency-over-border-wall-funding.html

The changing nature of executive orders when a new president comes in, potentially reversing prior orders:

• Pew Research: New presidents often issue executive orders to reverse those of their predecessors.
• Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/01/25/biden-reverses-trump-policies-in-first-days/

The Filibuster and Supermajority:

• C-SPAN: History of the Senate filibuster.
• Source: https://www.c-span.org/video/?456943-1/us-senate-filibuster-history
• Congress.gov: Information on the filibuster and its effect on legislation.
• Source: https://www.congress.gov/filibuster

CNN. “House fails to override Trump’s veto of emergency declaration.” March 26, 2019.

• Source: https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/26/politics/house-veto-vote-wall-emergency-resolution/index.html