The minefield surrounding Trump's Biden investigation
THE COVER-UP, NOT THE CRIME — Donald Trump's decision this week to investigate Joe Biden's White House in an attempt to reverse his pardons may have been easy for many Democrats to dismiss out of hand. After all, despite recent revelations concerning Biden's mental acuity, there is little evidence at the moment to believe that he was so impaired that he did not know what he was doing — as the Trump White House has suggested — and there is no discernible legal path to invalidating the pardons that he issued prior to leaving office.
Still, it would be a mistake to assume that this investigation will go nowhere. And it would be a mistake to assume that there will be no serious political — or legal — repercussions, depending on how it unfolds.
To understand why, look no further than special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation during Trump's first term. That investigation began by looking at the Trump campaign's connections to the Russian government, but it ended up focused on Trump's alleged obstruction of the investigation itself. High-profile political investigations have a way of drifting, and in the case of the Mueller investigation, Trump's political opponents largely ate it all up.
In the case of the Biden investigation, Trump's announcement zeroed in on Biden's use of an autopen to issue pardons, but the scope of the investigation is supposed to be broader than that and potentially covers several other topics. They include:
At the moment, the investigation is supposed to be run by the White House counsel's office 'in consultation with the Attorney General,' but if the investigation escalates, it is not inconceivable for it to transition into a criminal investigation run by prosecutors with grand jury authority.
At that point, Biden world — the constellation of White House aides and campaign operatives that adamantly supported Biden's reelection bid until and through his disastrous debate with Trump — could come under the sort of legal pressure that dogged Trump and his allies after the 2020 election. This is presumably not lost on Trump or his White House aides, and do not be surprised if Trump at some point decides to waive executive privilege on behalf of the Biden White House, as Biden did to Trump after the 2020 election.
This is not to say that the results of the investigation would warrant actual criminal charges when all is said and done. But there is at least one criminal statute that could draw the attention of investigators — in particular, the federal law that makes it a crime to conspire to defraud the United States. The statute is broad, and it would come with a semi-serious, but also politically troll-ish benefit: It was one of the statutes that special counsel Jack Smith used in the criminal case against Trump concerning his effort to overturn the 2020 election.
Even an investigation that goes nowhere can be incredibly burdensome — and costly — for its subjects.
In this case, a lengthy investigation could also create some risks for the Democratic Party's most prominent figures headed into the 2028 Democratic primary season — which is not as far away as we all might like to believe.
For example, it is not hard to envision prosecutors at the Trump Justice Department — if it comes to that — subpoenaing prominent former Biden officials, including potential 2028 contenders like former Vice President Kamala Harris and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. In broad strokes, the questions would be politically familiar ones: What did you know, and when did you know it?
The investigation also potentially implicates the broader Democratic Party apparatus and partisan media outlets that supported Biden throughout 2024. That is not so much a legal problem as it is a potential political or professional one for those involved — particularly as the party struggles to find its way out of the political wilderness, and as operatives within the party jockey for position headed into 2028.
A years-long investigation into an alleged Biden White House cover-up that was aided and abetted by prominent members of the Democratic Party and media allies has the potential to be very inconvenient for the party — and also to attract sustained attention from Trump's allies in the Republican Party and conservative media. It is not hard to see why this would be appealing for the Trump White House, even setting aside the potential legal merits (or lack thereof).
Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@politico.com. Or contact tonight's author at akhardori@politico.com.
What'd I Miss?
— Musk, Trump blow up over GOP megabill: President Donald Trump publicly chastised Elon Musk — his onetime adviser and a major political benefactor — today, amid the Tesla CEO's continued attempts to take down the cornerstone of Republicans' legislative agenda. Responding to a question about Musk's posts during a bilateral meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz at the White House, Trump said he was 'surprised' and 'disappointed' by Musk's attacks. 'He hasn't said [anything] bad about me personally, but I'm sure that will be next,' the president said on Thursday. Sure enough, minutes later, Musk said on X: 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate.' 'Such ingratitude,' Musk added.
— Supreme Court rejected higher standard for 'reverse discrimination' lawsuits: The Supreme Court today revived a lawsuit by an Ohio woman who said her bosses discriminated against her for being straight. The court unanimously ruled that members of majority groups do not face a higher legal standard than minorities to prevail in so-called reverse discrimination lawsuits under Title VII, the federal civil rights law that bars employment discrimination on the basis of race, sex and other protected characteristics.
— Federal judge blocks Trump administration's efforts to gut AmeriCorps: A federal judge today blocked the Trump administration from dismantling AmeriCorps in two dozen Democratic-led states, another blow to President Donald Trump's efforts to shrink vast swaths of the federal government. The ruling from U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman, a Joe Biden appointee, came after a coalition of 24 states and the District of Columbia sued the administration in April, accusing the Department of Government Efficiency of illegally gutting the volunteer agency.
— Trump, in show of NATO support, nominates official to key role with alliance: President Donald Trump has nominated Air Force Lt. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich to lead U.S. and NATO forces in Europe, sending a strong signal the administration will continue to play a leadership role in the alliance. Some allies, amid reports the Trump administration was reconsidering the position, worried the president would choose not to prioritize Europe and decline to place an American at the helm of NATO forces. A U.S. officer has filled the role since Gen. Dwight Eisenhower took the job in 1951 and is a symbol of American commitment to the region.
— Trump speaks to Xi for first time since taking office: President Donald Trump said he spoke today with China's leader, Xi Jinping, breaking the monthslong silence between the two men. It represents a significant, positive step for China-U.S. relations as the two countries work to deescalate a trade war Trump started this spring by levying 145 percent tariffs on China. The Chinese retaliated, halting trade between the two countries. It's the first call between the two world leaders since Trump's second term began, yet it was not immediately clear to what extent Trump and Xi had sorted out any of the sticking points between the two countries.
AROUND THE WORLD
WORKING TOGETHER — Russia is catching up to Ukraine in drone production thanks to greater financial resources, production lines far from the front lines and especially help from China, a senior Ukrainian official told POLITICO.
'Chinese manufacturers provide them with hardware, electronics, navigation, optical and telemetry systems, engines, microcircuits, processor modules, antenna field systems, control boards, navigation. They use so-called shell companies, change names, do everything to avoid being subject to export control and avoid sanctions for their activities,' said Oleh Aleksandrov, spokesperson for the Ukrainian Foreign Intelligence Service. 'Yet officially, China sticks to all the rules. Yet only officially.'
Beijing has repeatedly denied supplying any drones or weapons components to Russia, calling Ukrainian protests 'baseless accusations and political manipulation.' But Aleksandrov said Russia has a critical dependency on the supply of Chinese spare parts for both tactical and long-range drones.
That is allowing Russia to erode Ukraine's lead in drone technology and production — something that helped keep Ukraine in the fight at times when it was suffering from ammunition shortages and slow weapons deliveries from its allies.
Nightly Number
RADAR SWEEP
CAN'T BEAT THE CLASSICS — After a $2 billion dollar worldwide concert tour, four original studio albums and four re-recordings of her 2010s classics, Taylor Swift officially bought back her masters (or original recordings) from Shamrock Capital last week. While Swift's re-recording projects revolutionized the music industry with exclusive songs and a Swiftie Renaissance, Rolling Stone's Larisha Paul argues that the raw emotion, youthful feel and early country twang of her reacquired classics are irreplaceable — they are the ones that truly shape her musical legacy.
Parting Image
Marisa Guerra Echeverria contributed to this newsletter.
Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
23 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Pope Leo Sells Out US Event Clashing With Parade on Trump's Birthday
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Pope Leo XIV has helped sell out a stadium show in Chicago with a promised virtual appearance—scheduled for the same day as a major military parade in Washington, D.C. Within the first 15 minutes of ticket availability, more than 9,000 people requested seats for the Chicago gathering. By the end of the first day, that number had climbed to 20,000. As of Friday, the $5 tickets were completely sold out. The event will be streamed live online, although CatholicTV has not confirmed whether it will air the broadcast. Why It Matters Pope Leo's expected involvement in the Chicago event, which will be streamed online, will draw huge interest and will divide some attention away from the Trump-backed military parade the same day, the president's birthday. The pope, in his first address to world diplomats, said the dignity of migrants had to be respected, potentially putting himself on a collision course with the Trump administration, which has stepped up enforcement of immigration law, arguing voters' concerns on the topic have long been ignored. From left: Donald Trump attends a meeting at the White House in Washington, D.C., June 5, 2025; and Pope Leo XIV leaves after his weekly general audience in St. Peter's Square at The Vatican, May... From left: Donald Trump attends a meeting at the White House in Washington, D.C., June 5, 2025; and Pope Leo XIV leaves after his weekly general audience in St. Peter's Square at The Vatican, May 28, 2025. More AP What To Know The pontiff is set to appear on big screens at Rate Field, home of Major League Baseball's Chicago White Sox, on June 14. "Although Pope Leo XIV will not be present in Chicago for the event, he has announced that he will be participating remotely from Rome, with a video message to be played at the gathering," the Vatican's news service said in a June 2 release promoting the event. That same date, President Donald Trump's birthday, Washington D.C. will play host to a major military parade celebrating the U.S. Army's 250th birthday. Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport will be forced to shut down for several hours on June 14 to accommodate the parade, affecting more than 100 flights and thousands of passengers, according to The Washington Post. The New York Times reports the parade will feature 28 M1A1 Abrams tanks (each weighing 70 tons), 28 Stryker armored personnel carriers, more than 100 other military vehicles, 6,700 soldiers, 50 helicopters, 34 horses, two mules, and one dog. Notably, the Army did not hold a parade for its bicentennial in 1975. While the pontiff's message will be delivered from Rome, commentators noted the symbolism in the timing. "A bit of counterprogramming there," said MSNBC's Jonathan Lemire. "But I will say, when the Pope does come for real in the flesh—Chicago. Millions of people." John Heilemann, speaking alongside Lemire, added: "The counterprogramming point remains, Lemire, because the truth is—for America and Trump's military parade in Washington, if you don't live in Washington, that's a television spectacle. If you don't live in Chicago, the Pope's doing a video mass there at Rate Field. It's the same thing for those of us who live in New York. They're both just TV shows. And, you know, that's the definition of counterprogramming." The parade in Washington, meanwhile, is being promoted as a patriotic tribute to the U.S. Army's 250th birthday. A May 21 statement from the event organizers said it aims to "showcase the Army's modern capabilities" and "inspire a new generation to embrace the spirit of service, resilience, and leadership that defines the United States." Critics say the event is excessive and politically charged. "You know, there are so many reasons that you might want to push back on this military parade. All of them have been discussed before. There's a very kind of Kim Jong Un vibe to it," Heilemann told Lemire. "It's obviously going to be a kind of a nightmare, logistics-wise, for Washington, D.C. The streets are going to get all torn up. They're going to be filling in potholes from the damage that gets done for months to come." Trump and Pope Leo's Clash Over Immigration Since becoming the pontiff, Pope Leo has clashed with Trump—most notably over immigration policy. In one of his first major addresses as pope, U.S.-born Pope Leo XIV signaled a clear break from Trump's immigration stance, urging respect for migrants' dignity and compassion for those seeking a better life abroad. Speaking to diplomats at The Vatican, Leo reflected on his own roots as a descendant of immigrants and a former missionary in Peru. "My own story is that of a citizen, the descendant of immigrants, who in turn chose to emigrate," he said, adding that all people—"citizens and immigrants alike"—are equally worthy of dignity and protection. Leo's message contrasts sharply with Trump's vow to deport millions of undocumented immigrants. The late Pope Francis also clashed with Trump over immigration, once saying the president was "not Christian" for wanting to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. Leo's comments suggest that the Church under his leadership will continue to advocate for migrant rights. Before his election, Leo—then-Cardinal Robert Prevost—had pushed back on U.S. Vice President JD Vance's claim that Catholic theology prioritized caring for one's own over others, a statement Pope Leo reportedly disagreed with. In May, Pope Leo's brother John Prevost told The New York Times that his brother was "not happy" with Trump's immigration policy, adding that he "won't just sit back." "I know he's not happy with what's going on with immigration. I know that for a fact. How far he'll go with it is only one's guess, but he won't just sit back. I don't think he'll be the silent one," John Prevost said. What Happens Next Gates for the Chicago event will open at 12:30 p.m. on Saturday, June 14, with the program set to begin at 2:30 p.m. The day will conclude with a Holy Mass at 4 p.m., led by Cardinal Blase Cupich, Archbishop of Chicago. Tickets are still available for President Trump's parade.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk trades threats with Trump: What it could mean for SpaceX launches in California
When President Donald Trump took office in January, he began offering plenty of signs that his goals for U.S. spaceflight aligned closely with those of billionaire tech mogul Elon Musk. Now those goals, which included reaching Mars during Trump's second term as a top priority, appear to be up in the air amid an increasingly volatile fallout between two of the world's most powerful men. As insults have turned to threats, Trump has suggested he'd hit Musk where it could hurt most: His wallet. Musk's SpaceX has spent years positioning itself at the center of American civil and military spaceflight – a profitable relationship that has made the company's founder incredibly wealthy. In response, Musk has floated – and then retracted – the idea of decommissioning a SpaceX vehicle critical to NASA's spaceflight program. Serious threats, or empty words? That remains to be seen as Musk and Trump reportedly consider a détente. In the meantime, here's what to know about what's at stake if the U.S. government's relationship with SpaceX were to crumble: U.S. spaceflight: Dozens of NASA space missions could be axed under Trump's budget The feud between Trump and his former top adviser escalated in a dramatic fashion when the president threatened to cut off the taxpayer dollars that have fueled Elon Musk's businesses, including SpaceX. "The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts," Trump said in a post on his social media platform. "I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!" In all, Musk and his businesses have received at least $38 billion in government contracts, loans, subsidies and tax credits, a Washington Post analysis found. With SpaceX as the fulcrum of much of the U.S. government's spaceflight programs, parting ways with the commercial company would leave a void that would be hard to fill. But NASA Press Secretary Bethany Stevens said in a post on social media site X that 'NASA will continue to execute upon the President's vision for the future of space.' 'We will continue to work with our industry partners to ensure the President's objectives in space are met,' Stevens wrote. Elon Musk, the world's richest man, founded SpaceX, in 2002. The commercial spaceflight company is headquartered at Starbase in South Texas. The site, which is where SpaceX has been conducting routine flight tests of its 400-foot megarocket known as Starship, was recently voted by residents to become its own city. SpaceX conducts many of its own rocket launches, most using the Falcon 9 rocket, from both California and Florida. That includes a regular cadence of deliveries of Starlink internet satellites into orbit from the Vandenberg Space Force Base in Santa Barbara County. In the month of May alone, SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket deployed six different deliveries of Starlink satellites to low-Earth orbit. Recently, SpaceX has also moved its recovery operations from the Florida Coast to the coast of California for vehicles returning from orbit – with or without a crew. SpaceX also partners for occasional privately funded commercial crewed missions, the most recent of which was an April venture known as Fram2. SpaceX was additionally famously involved in funding and operating the headline-grabbing Polaris Dawn crewed commercial mission in September 2024. SpaceX benefits from billions of dollars in contracts from NASA and the Department of Defense by providing launch services for classified satellites and other payloads. Gwynne Shotwell, CEO of SpaceX, has said the company has about $22 billion in government contracts, according to Reuters. The vast majority of that, about $15 billion, is derived from NASA. SpaceX's famous two-stage Falcon 9 rocket ‒ one of the world's most active ‒ is routinely the rocket of choice to get many NASA missions off the ground. For instance, the rocket is due in the days ahead to help propel a four-person crew of private astronauts to the International Space Station for a venture with NASA known as Axiom Mission 4. NASA also has plans to use SpaceX's Starship in its Artemis lunar missions to ferry astronauts aboard the Orion capsule from orbit to the moon's surface. The rocket, which is in development, has yet to reach orbit in any of its nine flight tests beginning in April 2023. SpaceX's Dragon capsule is also a famous vehicle that is widely used for a variety of spaceflights. The capsule, which sits atop the Falcon 9 for launches to orbit, is capable of transporting both NASA astronauts and cargo to the space station. Under NASA's commercial crew program, the U.S. space agency has been paying SpaceX for years to conduct routine spaceflights to the International Space Station using the company's own launch vehicles. The first of SpaceX's Crew missions ferrying astronauts to the orbital outpost on the Dragon began in 2020, with the tenth and most recent contingent reaching the station in March for about a six-month stay. Standing nearly 27 feet tall and about 13 feet wide, Dragon capsules can carry up to seven astronauts into orbit, though most of SpaceX's Crew missions feature a crew of four. The Dragon spacecraft also was the vehicle NASA selected to bring home the two NASA astronauts who rode the doomed Boeing Starliner capsule to the space station in June 2024. Certifying the Starliner capsule for operation would give NASA a second vehicle in addition to Dragon for regular spaceflights to orbit. Because Boeing is still developing its Starliner capsule, Dragon is the only U.S. vehicle capable of carrying astronauts to and from the space station. It's also one of four vehicles contracted to transport cargo and other supplies to the orbital laboratory. For that reason, Musk's threat Thursday, June 5 to decommission the Dragon "immediately" would be a severe blow to NASA if he were to follow through on it. Musk, though, appears to already be backing off on the suggestion, which he made in response to Trump's own threats. In response to a user who advised Musk to "Cool off and take a step back for a couple days," Musk replied: 'Good advice. Ok, we won't decommission Dragon.' Seven astronauts are aboard the International Space Station, including three Americans. Four of the astronauts rode a SpaceX Dragon to the station for a mission known as Crew-10, while the remaining three launched on a Russian Soyuz spacecraft. Contributing: Joey Garrison, Josh Meyer, USA TODAY; Reuters Eric Lagatta is the Space Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach him at elagatta@ This article originally appeared on Ventura County Star: SpaceX California rocket launches: Trump-Musk feud's possible effects
Chicago Tribune
29 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
President Trump flexes emergency powers in his second term
WASHINGTON — Call it the 911 presidency. Despite insisting that the United States is rebounding from calamity under his watch, President Donald Trump is harnessing emergency powers unlike any of his predecessors. Whether it's leveling punishing tariffs, deploying troops to the borderor sidelining environmental regulations, Trump has relied on rules and laws intended only for use in extraordinary circumstances like war and invasion. An analysis by The Associated Press shows that 30 of Trump's 150 executive orders have cited some kind of emergency power or authority, a rate that far outpaces his recent predecessors. The result is a redefinition of how presidents can wield power. Instead of responding to an unforeseen crisis, Trump is using emergency powers to supplant Congress' authority and advance his agenda. 'What's notable about Trump is the enormous scale and extent, which is greater than under any modern president,' said Ilya Somin, who is representing five U.S. businesses who sued the administration, claiming they were harmed by Trump's so-called 'Liberation Day' tariffs. Because Congress has the power to set trade policy under the Constitution, the businesses convinced a federal trade court that Trump overstepped his authority by claiming an economic emergency to impose the tariffs. An appeals court has paused that ruling while the judges review it. The legal battle is a reminder of the potential risks of Trump's strategy. Judges traditionally have given presidents wide latitude to exercise emergency powers that were created by Congress. However, there's growing concern that Trump is pressing the limits when the U.S. is not facing the kinds of threats such actions are meant to address. 'The temptation is clear,' said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program and an expert in emergency powers. 'What's remarkable is how little abuse there was before, but we're in a different era now.' Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who has drafted legislation that would allow Congress to reassert tariff authority, said he believed the courts would ultimately rule against Trump in his efforts to single-handedly shape trade policy. 'It's the Constitution. James Madison wrote it that way, and it was very explicit,' Bacon said of Congress' power over trade. 'And I get the emergency powers, but I think it's being abused. When you're trying to do tariff policy for 80 countries, that's policy, not emergency action.' The White House pushed back on such concerns, saying Trump is justified in aggressively using his authority. 'President Trump is rightfully enlisting his emergency powers to quickly rectify four years of failure and fix the many catastrophes he inherited from Joe Biden — wide open borders, wars in Ukraine and Gaza, radical climate regulations, historic inflation, and economic and national security threats posed by trade deficits,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said. Of all the emergency powers, Trump has most frequently cited the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, to justify slapping tariffs on imports. The law, enacted in 1977, was intended to limit some of the expansive authority that had been granted to the presidency decades earlier. It is only supposed to be used when the country faces 'an unusual and extraordinary threat' from abroad 'to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.' In analyzing executive orders issued since 2001, the AP found that Trump has invoked the law 21 times in presidential orders and memoranda. President George W. Bush, grappling with the aftermath of the most devastating terror attack on U.S. soil, invoked the law just 14 times in his first term. Likewise, Barack Obama invoked the act only 21 times during his first term, when the U.S. economy faced the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression. The Trump administration has also deployed an 18th century law, the Alien Enemies Act, to justify deporting Venezuelan migrants to other countries, including El Salvador. Trump's decision to invoke the law relies on allegations that the Venezuelan government coordinates with the Tren de Aragua gang, but intelligence officials did not reach that conclusion. Congress has granted emergency powers to the presidency over the years, acknowledging that the executive branch can act more swiftly than lawmakers if there is a crisis. There are 150 legal powers — including waiving a wide variety of actions that Congress has broadly prohibited — that can only be accessed after declaring an emergency. In an emergency, for example, an administration can suspend environmental regulations, approve new drugs or therapeutics, take over the transportation system, or even override bans on testing biological or chemical weapons on human subjects, according to a list compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice. Democrats and Republicans have pushed the boundaries over the years. For example, in an attempt to cancel federal student loan debt, Joe Biden used a post-Sept. 11 law that empowered education secretaries to reduce or eliminate such obligations during a national emergency. The U.S. Supreme Court eventually rejected his effort, forcing Biden to find different avenues to chip away at his goals. Before that, Bush pursued warrantless domestic wiretapping and Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the detention of Japanese-Americans on the West Coast in camps for the duration of World War II. Trump, in his first term, sparked a major fight with Capitol Hill when he issued a national emergency to compel construction of a border wall. Though Congress voted to nullify his emergency declaration, lawmakers could not muster up enough Republican support to overcome Trump's eventual veto. 'Presidents are using these emergency powers not to respond quickly to unanticipated challenges,' said John Yoo, who as a Justice Department official under George W. Bush helped expand the use of presidential authorities. 'Presidents are using it to step into a political gap because Congress chooses not to act.' Trump, Yoo said, 'has just elevated it to another level.' Conservative legal allies of the president also said Trump's actions are justified, and Vice President JD Vance predicted the administration would prevail in the court fight over tariff policy. 'We believe — and we're right — that we are in an emergency,' Vance said last week in an interview with Newsmax. 'You have seen foreign governments, sometimes our adversaries, threaten the American people with the loss of critical supplies,' Vance said. 'I'm not talking about toys, plastic toys. I'm talking about pharmaceutical ingredients. I'm talking about the critical pieces of the manufacturing supply chain.' Vance continued, 'These governments are threatening to cut us off from that stuff, that is by definition, a national emergency.' Republican and Democratic lawmakers have tried to rein in a president's emergency powers. Two years ago, a bipartisan group of lawmakers in the House and Senate introduced legislation that would have ended a presidentially-declared emergency after 30 days unless Congress votes to keep it in place. It failed to advance. Similar legislation hasn't been introduced since Trump's return to office. Right now, it effectively works in the reverse, with Congress required to vote to end an emergency. 'He has proved to be so lawless and reckless in so many ways. Congress has a responsibility to make sure there's oversight and safeguards,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who cosponsored an emergency powers reform bill in the previous session of Congress. He argued that, historically, leaders relying on emergency declarations has been a 'path toward autocracy and suppression.'
