Opinion - Trump's most absurd executive order yet
Trump purports to rely on a series of Supreme Court rulings to justify ordering agencies to identify and 'begin plans to repeal' what he calls 'unlawful' regulations that are 'often promulgated in reliance on now-superseded Supreme Court decisions.' In short, he claims that any regulations that were put in place before the court issued rulings in a series of controversial cases are now automatically unlawful and must go.
The myriad constitutional problems with this maneuver strike at the heart of the separation of powers. The order is also in line with the Republican Party's pro-corporate 'deregulation' agenda, which prominently began with President Ronald Reagan in 1981.
Given the complexities of our system of government and its reliance on checks and balances and compromise, that agenda could not be fully achieved through lawful means. Then came Trump.
For starters, the federal courts — not the president — have the authority under Article III of the Constitution to decide cases involving questions of federal law, including whether recent Supreme Court decisions undermine the legality of an existing federal regulation. Trump is pretending he has the power to issue a king-like proclamation condemning unidentified federal regulations as unlawful. Not so. He is not a federal judge.
Moreover, Trump's order baldly impedes on the authority of the legislative branch. Regulations are created pursuant to statutes, which fall within the province of Congress. Although regulations function like statutes, the Supreme Court has long upheld agencies' power to enact regulations that function like statutes on the theory that the agencies themselves are creatures of Congress.
So long as Congress includes an 'intelligible principle' guiding how agencies promulgate regulations, the court has concluded that it can give that power to agencies, even though they are housed within the executive branch, which is headed by the president. Because Congress creates agencies and sometimes gives them the power to enact regulations, the legislature has the exclusive power to enact statutes that override those regulations, as well. Trump does not.
A final option for repealing final regulations (which number 3,000 to 4,000 per year) is for agencies themselves to do it. Congress has given agencies a list of procedures they must follow for enacting or repealing regulations. Those procedures are contained in a statute called the Administrative Procedure Act.
Enacting or repealing regulations with the force of law (i.e., the ones that function like statutes) is laborious, requiring the agencies to give notice to and get input from the public, among other hurdles. A decision to enact or repeal regulations is also subject to legal challenges under the Administrative Procedure Act. (See point above about the exclusive role of the courts here.)
So, for Trump to lawfully repeal what he deems 'unlawful regulations,' he must either go through Congress or invoke the Administrative Procedure Act's time-consuming process for repeal. If he chooses that latter route, he must then defend those repeals in the courts, which can take years to resolve. And if he doesn't like the tedium of the Administrative Procedure Act, which has been in place since 1946, he must persuade Congress to repeal or amend it. No Congress has been willing to do this in nearly 80 years, except to enhance executive accountability, as with the 1966 Freedom of Information Act.
Trump's cynical team of lawyers offers a fig leaf of legal justification for this obnoxious turn of events. The 'good cause' exception to the Administrative Procedure Act's notice-and-comment process for repealing a regulation. The law basically says that a 'good cause' shortcut is permissible if 'the agency for good cause finds' that compliance with the notice-and-comment process would be 'impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'
Congress included this language mostly for emergencies — if there is a national health crisis involving imported chicken, for example, the Department of Agriculture might decide to invoke the good-cause exception to put rules on the books in a pinch, on the theory that waiting for the full process to play out would put public health at risk. But even if that's the case, agencies usually conduct full rulemakings after the fact in order to make sure that the regulations hit the right mark. Trump's executive order promises no such thing.
To justify the good-cause exception, Trump's order asserts that 'retaining and enforcing facially unlawful regulations is clearly contrary to the public interest.' But this circular reasoning virtually obliterates Congress's careful process for rulemaking altogether. If a president can just declare regulations unlawful, then the good-cause exception can simply swallow up the Administrative Procedure Act's bigger requirements for notice and comment. There is no way Congress intended such a self-defeating result.
What about Trump's power to issue executive orders — doesn't that give him the authority to do this? The Constitution says nothing about executive orders. Article II instead gives the president the 'executive power' and mandates that he 'take care that the Laws be faithfully executed.' Trump's order declaring the repeal of 'unlawful' regulations attempts to erase actual laws by presidential fiat. The Supreme Court has long made clear, however, that presidents cannot use executive orders to override or contradict legislation enacted by Congress.
Presidents are not kings. They do not act by edict. Legally, they can only act pursuant to constitutional and statutory law. Trump's action does neither.
For now, it will be up to Trump's loyal Cabinet — and whatever career federal employees still remain — to enact his edict by 'repealing' regulations that evince something on the list of disfavored features contained in the executive order. The courts will be asked to step in, and some will strike down the administration's actions. The Supreme Court justices may or may not back their colleagues on the lower courts, and Trump may or may not abide by those rulings.
But in the meantime, Congress — and the country — must stop treating this as normal.
Kimberly Wehle is author of the book 'Pardon Power: How the Pardon System Works — and Why.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
23 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Pope Leo says migrants and refugees can bring light and aspiration from dark corners of the world
'In a world darkened by war and injustice, even when all seems lost, migrants and refugees stand as messengers of hope,' he said. 'Their courage and tenacity bear heroic testimony to a faith that sees beyond what our eyes can see and gives them the strength to defy death on the various contemporary migration routes.' Advertisement The remarks from Leo, who ascended to the papacy earlier this year to become the first American pope, come amid the Trump administration's crackdown on immigration. In recent months, Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in Los Angeles and other cities have sparked protests across the country, and a surge in detentions has led to immigrants being held in overcrowded facilities with deteriorating conditions. Pope Leo showed a special interest in the well-being of immigrants during his work before the Vatican and has been described as the 'first modern immigrant pope.' In a May meeting, he emphasized this side of his past to diplomats, telling them, 'My own story is that of a citizen, the descendant of immigrants, who in turn chose to emigrate.' Advertisement 'All of us, in the course of our lives, can find ourselves healthy or sick, employed or unemployed, living in our native land or in a foreign country, yet our dignity always remains unchanged: It is the dignity of a creature willed and loved by God,' he said. Before his papacy, Leo served the poor in Peru for decades and was especially concerned about Venezuelan migrants who fled there, opening churches as soup kitchens and asking priests to convert free spaces into makeshift refuges while bishop of Chiclayo. That side of his work has resonated with other leaders in the church. The Rev. Russell Pollitt, a Jesuit priest at Holy Trinity Catholic Church near Johannesburg, said in May that Leo 'seems to have been someone who was on the side of migrants and refugees flocking to Peru from Venezuela.' 'I think that's important, that we don't lose that. Migrants and refugees are becoming a sort of scapegoat for politicians,' he said. In this past week's letter, Leo stressed that communities that welcome migrants and refugees can become living witnesses to hope. 'In this way, migrants and refugees are recognized as brothers and sisters, part of a family in which they can express their talents and participate fully in community life.' He wished for spiritual protection for 'all those who are on the journey, as well as those who are working to accompany them.'


The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
Venezuelan Little League team denied US visas for World Series
A Venezuelan Little League baseball team will miss the Senior Baseball World Series held in South Carolina after it was was denied entry into the U.S. because the players were unable to obtain visas. Cacique Mara Little League team, from Maracaibo, Venezuela, qualified for the World Series after winning the Latin American championship in Mexico, but will not be able to compete in Easley, S.C. because they were unable to 'obtain the appropriate visas' to travel, according to Little League International. Little League International said in a statement to The Hill that while this is 'extremely disappointing, especially to these young athletes,' the tournament committee has decided to advance the second-place team from the Latin American championship, Santa María de Aguayo from Tamaulipas, Mexico. The league said the replacement will ensure the 'Latin America Region is represented in the tournament and that the players, coaches and families from Mexico are able to have a memorable World Series experience.' A senior State Department official told The Hill on Saturday that U.S. consular officers are currently 'working to review the case to confirm proper procedures were followed and necessary appeals were submitted by the visa applicants.' Venezuela is on President Trump's list of countries where the entry of their nationals is partially restricted or limited. Six other countries — Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo and Turkmenistan — are also included. In early June, Trump also fully restricted the entry of nationals from 12 nations: Afghanistan, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. The administration pointed to national security concerns when announcing the travel restrictions. The Venezuelan baseball team went to Colombia two weeks ago to apply for travel visas, according to The Associated Press (AP). 'It is a mockery on the part of Little League to keep us here in Bogotá with the hope that our children can fulfill their dreams of participating in a world championship,' the baseball team said in a statement, according to the AP. 'What do we do with so much injustice, what do we do with the pain that was caused to our children.'

24 minutes ago
USAID analysis finds no evidence of widespread aid diversion by Hamas in Gaza
An analysis compiled by USAID officials examining more than 150 reported incidents involving the theft or loss of U.S.-funded humanitarian aid in the war-torn Gaza Strip says it failed to find any evidence that Hamas -- the militant rulers of the Palestinian enclave -- engaged in widespread diversion of assistance, according to a presentation reviewed by ABC News. The findings of the report appear to undercut the Trump administration's repeated claims that Hamas has regularly interfered with aid distribution in the past -- assertions it has used to justify its support for the controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) and for measures undertaken by Israel to limit the flow of assistance to neighboring Gaza through other pathways. The GHF -- with Israel's approval and despite rejection from the United Nations -- took over most of the aid distribution system in Gaza on May 27, after an 11-week Israeli blockade on all supplies from entering the strip. Israel has long accused Hamas of stealing aid provided by the U.N. -- formerly the main distributor -- and others to fund its militant activity -- claims which Hamas denies. Israel has allowed a limited amount of supplies into Gaza since lifting the blockade and, according to an Israeli security official, is "coordinating future airdrops of aid" by foreign countries "that are expected to take place in the coming days." This comes after a coalition of more than 100 organizations warned this week that "mass starvation" is spreading in Gaza with "supplies now totally depleted." USAID officials behind the presentation say they analyzed alleged incidents of fraud, abuse and waste reported between October 2023, when the ongoing Israel-Hamas war began, and last May. It was compiled before the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) -- once the world's largest single donor of humanitarian aid -- officially ceased independent operations on July 1. The Trump administration canceled more than 80% of the agency's programs, while the remainder were absorbed by the U.S. Department of State. USAID officials say their findings indicate that in the majority of cases involving the loss of aid, the perpetrator could not be definitively identified. The Israel Defense Forces denied the report in a statement to ABC News, saying "not only does the report ignore clear and explicit evidence that Hamas exploits humanitarian aid to sustain its fighting capabilities, it goes so far as to criticize the IDF for routing decisions made specifically to protect humanitarian staff and shipments." The IDF added that when it "directs aid deliveries along specific routes, it is based on the operational reality and intelligence assessments, aimed at safeguarding both the aid and the humanitarian actors — precisely the issue the report claims is not being addressed." The State Department is also pushing back forcefully on the analysis, which was first reported by Reuters, as well as media coverage related to the matter. A State Department spokesperson called it "astonishing" that "the media is busy debating whether the masterminds of Oct. 7 are somehow too principled to loot." "There is endless video evidence of Hamas looting, not to mention members of the aid-industrial complex who have admitted that looting exists by reporting it as 'self-distribution,' in a poor attempt at an aid corruption coverup," the spokesperson said. "Available intelligence confirms what is reflected in open-source information: that a significant portion of non-GHF aid trucks have been diverted, looted, stolen, or 'self-distributed.'" Despite this, the Trump administration -- a staunch ally of Israel -- has provided no evidence of Hamas carrying out widespread aid diversion to date. The IDF said it is "making tremendous efforts to enable the safe distribution of humanitarian aid under complex operational conditions." The ongoing Gaza war erupted after Hamas led a surprise terror attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing 1,200 people there and taking 251 others hostage, according to figures from the Israeli government. Since then, Israeli forces have killed more than 59,000 people in Gaza, according to data released by the strip's Hamas-run Ministry of Health.