What Is a Constitutional Crisis and Are We in One Under the Second Trump Administration?
Stay up-to-date with the politics team. Sign up for the Teen Vogue Take
You might have heard the term 'constitutional crisis' thrown around on social media or in the news lately. What used to be a relatively obscure concept you might learn about in civics class is now suddenly being talked about everywhere. Some say we're in a full-blown constitutional crisis, others claim we're veering toward one, and others believe the panic is overblown.
Here's what the data says: Today, a majority of Democrats and Independents agree that the United States is experiencing a constitutional crisis, while just 3 in 10 Republicans say the same, according to surveys conducted by the States United Democracy Center and YouGov.
As the leader of an organization that works to protect our democracy, and as a lawyer who served at the highest levels of state government, it's hard to disagree with the majority of my fellow Americans as I look at what's happening in our country right now — it feels like we are in a constitutional crisis.
But what is a constitutional crisis? Is there an on-off switch, or is it a spectrum? And, more importantly, why should you care and what can you do about it?
To answer that big question, we have to look at the source material: The United States Constitution. Our Constitution lays out a system of government that divides certain powers between the Congress, the courts, and the president, while giving states the authority to govern their people and to check the federal government.
After a series of debates and compromises, the framers of the Constitution created that system of checks and balances to prevent any one branch of government from exercising too much power. Our democracy is built to withstand our differences while safeguarding our freedoms.
You were likely taught how it's supposed to work: The president can veto Congress's bills. Congress can refuse to fund the president's priorities or reject their nominees. The courts can strike down laws they deem unconstitutional. And states can defend against federal overreach.
In short, the Constitution is like a democracy rulebook. But it also relies heavily on the idea that people in power will respect those rules. An attempt to undermine or go around the system is an attack on our democracy. That's a constitutional crisis.
The Constitution puts guardrails on the president's power — whether he likes it or not. But since President Donald Trump took office again in January 2025, the executive branch has repeatedly gone beyond its constitutional authority, testing the bounds of federal power like never before.
Most recently, in response to protests in California, Trump moved thousands of National Guard units from state control to federal service. The action came without authorization from the governor, who is typically in command. When governors need federal assistance, they ask. It should not be forced on them.
Trump has attempted to freeze federal funding for everything from disaster relief to child care. One problem: He doesn't have that power. The Constitution gives Congress the 'power of the purse' — the right to decide when and how our federal tax dollars are spent. And Congress has already promised those funds for essential services for everyday Americans.
Federal judges have repeatedly ordered the administration to cease its attempts to stop funding for essential services. But as these lawsuits wind through the courts, real people are being hurt. State and local health departments can't pay staff, college students are having trouble accessing federal financial assistance, and job training programs are being canceled — all because of an unconstitutional power grab.
Our system is set up so that when there are constitutional disputes between the branches of government, we look to the courts to resolve them. And an overwhelming majority of Americans agree that the law should be applied equally to everyone, including those in power, according to March polling from States United and YouGov. When a court issues a ruling, it's not a suggestion — it's the law. Even the president must comply.
Imagine if a regular person, after being convicted of a violent crime in court, could decide to ignore the jury and walk free? Americans would never stand for that. Yet, the Trump administration continues to defy court orders across the country. They reportedly didn't turn around planes carrying people being deported to El Salvador. They spent weeks refusing to comply with an order from the Supreme Court to 'facilitate' the return of a Maryland resident who was wrongfully deported. And they refused to let Associated Press journalists into Oval Office events, even after a judge found that was a violation of the First Amendment. Administration officials have also made a series of concerning statements calling into question the judicial system's check on executive power.
When it comes to the Trump administration disregarding our system of checks and balances, the list goes on. You've probably heard about how the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk until his recent departure, gutted federal agencies that were created by Congress. But did you know that Trump also tried to use an executive order to change key aspects of how we run elections? The Constitution is very clear that states have authority over our elections. That helps ensure that elections work for the people, not the party in power in Washington, DC. It's how we keep our elections free, fair, and secure. Trump tried to grab that state power. Once again, a judge stopped him, blocking parts of his order.
By the way, many of Trump's executive orders haven't just been deemed illegal in the courts — they're also unpopular. Nearly three-quarters of Americans believe policy changes should happen through the passage of a bill in Congress, not an executive order by the president, according to our March poll with YouGov.
No one person gets to declare a constitutional crisis, just like no one person gets to break our democracy. And even if there were a 'constitutional crisis' switch we could flip, there would be no cavalry riding to the defense of American democracy. We are the cavalry.
We can debate the wording. We can argue over what really tips us into crisis, but at the end of the day, that's a distraction meant to divide us further. Because here's what I'll tell you is really important: President Trump continues to violate our constitutional system. Plain as day. He's breaking the law and ignoring the people who are meant to keep him in check.
Despite all that, I firmly believe it's not too late. The Trump administration has done a lot of damage in these first five months, but we can still preserve American democracy. Enforcing and upholding the Constitution is the way forward. And we need to use every power that our country's founders gave us to do so. Because this is our democracy — our future. And the Constitution is our rulebook. It begins, 'We the People,' after all.
Many of our state leaders — governors, attorneys general, and secretaries of state — are standing up for the Constitution and our freedoms, and our team at States United is committed to supporting them. Judges across the country are interpreting the law without fear or favor. But we also need citizens — especially young people — who are informed, engaged, and unafraid to speak out.
You've already taken the first step, which is educating yourself on how the system works. What's next? You can vote, organize, protest, and lead. You can express your views online and challenge disinformation. You can work or volunteer for an organization that's fighting back. You can support elected officials who defend the rule of law, hold accountable those who don't, and one day run for office yourself.
We can't take our democracy for granted. The Constitution doesn't enforce itself. It relies on each of us to uphold it. The question isn't whether we are in a constitutional crisis. It's what we're going to do about it.
Originally Appeared on Teen Vogue
Want more U.S. government coverage?
The Current Supreme Court Is Illegitimate
What It's Like to Live In a State Run By Politicians You Can't Stand
Mass Incarceration Is Cruel, Expensive, and Ineffective
The True Story of a White Supremacist Insurrection in the U.S.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
I outran ICE. Now I'm back on the streets looking for illegal work
When a black Jeep rolled into the Home Depot car park just after 8.30am on Friday morning, Abraham sprung into action. As Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) agents dressed in vests and helmets climbed out of their blacked-out vehicle, he did his best to warn his fellow illegal migrants camped outside the hardware store in search of work. 'La migra! La migra!' he screamed, before sprinting away from the scene. Dozens of people tried to follow him. 'I felt very scared when I saw them coming but I ran like a flash and they didn't get me,' he says. Like the 100 or so men who gather daily outside the DIY shop in Westlake, Los Angeles, that morning Abraham had been hoping to pick up a day's work from customers in need of help for their home improvements. Most of those he was standing with are undocumented. Nicaragua-born Abraham managed to escape but not everyone was so lucky. At least 40 men, some of whom had lived in the US for decades, were handcuffed and detained by ICE agents who had raided a string of workplaces and Home Depot locations that morning, sparking a wave of volatile protests which have gripped Los Angeles and spread to more than 35 other cities. Despite the pervasive threat of deportation, Abraham was back at the Home Depot parking lot on Wednesday morning to resume his search for work. The targeting of day labourers in Home Depots, workers at car washes and clothing manufacturers marks a gear change in the administration's attempts to ramp up its deportation efforts in order to fulfil Donald Trump's 'largest deportation program' in US history. While officials had initially focused their efforts on those with criminal records, Stephen Miller, the architect of Mr Trump's hardline immigration policy, instructed ICE field officers to begin widening their nets. Mr Miller has set a target of 'at least' 3,000 arrests a day, a steep jump from the roughly 660 daily arrests during Mr Trump's first 100 days in office. He is understood to have directed ICE chiefs to start targeting spots where migrants congregate, specifically naming Home Depot. It is a move that has drawn fierce opposition from not only Mr Trump's political opponents such as Gavin Newsom, the Democrat governor, but also from some of the Republican leader's supporters, with Florida State Senator Ileana Garcia, the co-founder of Latinas for Trump, saying the move was 'not what we voted for'. While demonstrations have brought parts of the state to a standstill, the ICE raids have continued at pace, with uniformed officers chasing farmworkers through fields and turning up at churches to arrest migrants. While the majority of migrants have stayed home amid the ongoing threat, Abraham, a father-of-two, who crossed the El Paso border with Ciudad Juarez three years ago, says he has no choice but to take the risk and continue his search for work at Home Depot. 'I'm not afraid to come... I have to work because if I don't work I can't eat,' he tells The Telegraph as he cools himself from the California sun with a pink plastic portable fan. Obdulio, another undocumented worker who managed to flee the Home Depot raid on Friday, had also returned on Wednesday despite seeing at least a dozen people 'grabbed' by ICE agents. The Guatemalan, who has lived in the US for 20 years, was frustrated he could not do anything to help his friends. 'You can't confront them because they're going to take you away, so what we did was shout at people to run and we kept running,' he says. Obdulio, 48, who did not want to give his last name, told The Telegraph: 'We are still in fear because we've heard ICE is still roaming here.' 'We're not criminals, we come to work honestly without harming anyone,' he adds. Standing on the other side of the Westlake Home Depot car park, Edwin Cuadra, who is from Guatemala and has a green card, recounted how he saw ICE agents arriving on Friday morning in his car's wing mirror. 'Those who don't have papers had to escape, they started running,' he says. The number of people out looking for work has since dwindled, he says, because migrants are terrified they will be caught. 'It's very bad,' he adds, becoming tearful. 'They are my brothers, like my family. They need the money to pay rent, to pay bills.' On the sixth day of demonstrations in Los Angeles, a largely peaceful protest of around 1,000 protesters briefly became chaotic when police on horseback charged at protesters and hit them with wooden rods before the area's 8pm curfew came into effect. Officers fired rubber bullets and pepper balls into the crowd before carrying out dozens of arrests and packing protesters into police vans, but the streets downtown were mostly quiet by 9pm. In recent days demonstrations across the city at times became violent, with some agitators setting fire to cars and throwing Molotov cocktails, fireworks and rocks at police. Some of the thousands of National Guard troops controversially deployed by Mr Trump despite governor Gavin Newsom insisting they were not needed have been assisting ICE officers as they round up illegal migrants on raids, standing by with their rifles as agents arrest and detain people. The 700 Marines sent into Los Angeles by Mr Trump will also accompany ICE agents on missions, officials have said, sparking fears that the administration could further intensify the pace of its raids. Mr Newsom has warned the unprecedented militarisation of the state would spread further. 'Democracy is under assault right before our eyes,' he said on Tuesday. 'California may be first, but it clearly won't end here.' The Department of Homeland Security released an Uncle Sam style poster on social media on Wednesday urging members of the public to report 'foreign invaders'. As ICE raids continued in spite of the protests, on Monday morning a Home Depot in Huntington Park, around eight miles away from the Westlake branch, was targeted. Eduardo Baz, 45, who illegally crossed into the US from Honduras 20 years ago, was lucky to have escaped. He had been a safe distance away when he saw federal agents starting to detain migrants in the car park at around 7.30am. The only saving grace, he says, was that it was early so not many people had arrived at the shop. On Wednesday morning he was one of a handful of migrants who had returned to the car park hoping to pick up work. 'Of course we're all afraid,' he says. 'All these years later, they can send you home in one swoop.' 'You're never calm, you're always afraid they might catch you at any moment.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas clarified when abortions are OK and aligned with RFK Jr. on health this legislative session
The 2025 Texas Legislature proved to be a session of recalibration, where health care regulations were either tightened or loosened and attempts to delve further into some policy areas were left hanging until the next session. The past two legislative sessions saw more seismic shifts: a near-total ban on abortion, a massive expansion of the state's psychiatric hospital system, the teeniest of Medicaid expansions to offer one year of insurance coverage to new moms and a mental health budget boom following the tragic Uvalde school shooting. That didn't appear to leave much for the 89th Legislature to do on health, although lawmakers managed to approve a handful of intriguing bills and budget requests while killing other proposals. Vaccine-hesitant parents successfully lobbied and won easier access to the vaccine exemption form and lawmakers narrowly clarified the state's near-total abortion bans to give doctors more confidence in performing life-saving abortions. They also passed a historic $3 billion dementia research fund that awaits voter approval in November. There were also a variety of bills signaling to the Trump administration, particularly U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., that Texas was all on board his priorities to create transparency on food labeling and to stamp out chronic diseases. The remaining health care cliffhanger is whether Gov. Greg Abbott signs or vetoes a hard-fought ban on THC products in the state. Abbott has until June 22 to veto any legislation passed this session. Otherwise, most of them will go into effect immediately or in September, even without his signature. Here's a rundown of how health care fared this past session. House Bill 1586 allows anyone the ability to download a vaccine exemption vaccine exemption form at home. The form allows children to be exempted from being vaccinated to attend public schools. Currently, parents have to contact the Texas Department of State of Health Services and request the exemption form be mailed to them. Critics of the bill fear it would allow vaccine exemptions to flourish, as the state grapples with declining vaccination rates, but proponents say the bill is only meant to make it easier for parents to access a form. Other vaccine skeptic measures that passed include HB 4076 which bars making patients ineligible as organ transplant recipients solely based on their vaccination status and Senate Bill 269 which requires providers to report patients' vaccine complications to the national Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. HB 4535 requires health care providers obtain informed consent from patients before a COVID-19 vaccine is administered and that patients receive notice about possible side effects. Two nutrition bills dubbed Make Texas Healthy Again bills passed. Texans who receive benefits through the federal Supplemental Nutrition and Assistance Program will no longer be able to purchase soda and candy with their Lone Star card following the passage of SB 379. SB 25 requires food manufacturers to label foods by 2027 that contain any one of 44 additives or colorings not permitted in food sold in the United Kingdom, Australia, the European Union or Canada. The state labeling requirements would take effect on Jan. 1, 2027 but a loophole exists that if on Dec. 31, 2026 a snack food producer wants to stick with its existing packaging for another decade, no warning label is needed because the new law 'applies only to a food product label developed or copyrighted on or after January 1, 2027.' The bill also requires elementary, secondary and postsecondary educational institutions to re-prioritize health and exercise. It also forces health professionals to take continuing education courses regarding nutrition and metabolic health. And it will require recess or physical activity for kids in charter schools – physical activity is already required in public schools. HB 26 creates a pilot program within Medicaid to offer pregnant moms with nutritional counseling and medically-tailored meals. Texas banned all abortions three years ago, with a narrow exception that allows doctors to terminate a pregnancy only to save a pregnant patient's life. Immediately, doctors and legal experts warned that this exception was too narrow and vaguely written, and the penalties were too severe, to ensure women could get life-saving care. SB 31 says doctors need not wait until death is imminent to intervene, but affirms that the condition must be life-threatening to justify performing an abortion. It will also require doctors and lawyers to take continuing education courses on the nuances of the law. Legislators passed a bill restricting cities, like Austin and San Antonio, from using taxpayer dollars to assist people who travel out-of-state to have an abortion. But the highest profile anti-abortion bill, SB 2880, which would have allowed anyone who manufactures, distributes, provides or prescribes abortion pills to be sued for $100,000 passed the Senate but stalled in the House. Lawmakers passed bills to expand crisis hotline services and provide loan reimbursement to address the mental health workforce shortage. After a couple days of debate about the role of mental health professionals in Texas, lawmakers passed SB 646, which broadens eligibility for Texas' loan repayment assistance program to include school counselors, marriage and family therapists, and other behavioral health professionals. HB 5342 establishes the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline Trust Fund, which will accept donations, grants and federal funds to maintain or improve the crisis line. Additionally, the bill mandates an annual report on the usage of the crisis centers participating in the 988 network. Texas lawmakers imposed some restrictions on how minors accessed social media. SB 2420 sets up requirements for age verification and parental consent before a minor is allowed to download or make purchases within software applications. Under this bill, developers must assign age ratings to their apps, disclose the reason for the rating, and notify the app stores of any significant changes. Parental consent will not be required for specific emergency or educational applications, such as those providing access to crisis hotlines. A bill to ban minors from social media altogether failed in the last few days of the legislative session. Several budget items involving health care and services for Texans were also approved. Among them were an extra $100 million to fund child care scholarships to low income families on a waitlist for child care. Nearly 95,000 Texas children are on a waitlist for child care scholarships at a time when facilities are closing and the cost of child care in Texas is making it difficult for working parents to make ends meet. Last year, HHSC asked for $300 million worth of upgrades for its Medicaid and food stamps enrollment system but will? receive less than half that ask, about $139 million. The agency's request came after Texas and the nation suspended Medicaid rules requiring participants to renew their applications more often during the pandemic and then removed nearly 2 million participants following the pandemic. The improvements will shorten the time between application for health care coverage and food assistance and activation of those benefits. In Texas, Medicaid is mostly a children's health insurance program. Only low income children, the elderly and new moms are covered by Medicaid in this state. There is also a $18 million increase over the next two years for the state's Early Childhood Intervention (ECI) services which assists families with children up to 36 months who have developmental delays, disabilities or certain medical diagnoses that may impact development. A $60 million rider was put in to cover Texas' costs of entering a federal summer lunch program in 2027. The 2023 program would give qualifying parents $120 over the summer months to help pay for lunches when school is out of session. More than 30 states now participate in the Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer program which also goes by the name Sun Bucks. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick championed the passage of Senate Bill 5, which creates the Dementia Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, to study dementia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and other brain conditions. Modeled after Texas' cancer institute, the measure received bipartisan support. Abbott has signed the bill but the measure now goes before the voters to approve whether $3 billion in general revenue can be used to fund the project. The Texas Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General's office investigates health care and benefit fraud. This year, a handful of bills were passed to help streamline investigations by the office and update salary classifications for OIG officers to those of other Texas law enforcement officers, improving recruiting. This comes as the office has been instrumental in identifying fraud within some of the state's health benefits systems, leading to firings of some agency employees.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump finds victories at the Supreme Court in rush of emergency cases
By Andrew Chung (Reuters) -Since President Donald Trump returned to office in January, his administration has bombarded the U.S. Supreme Court with emergency requests seeking immediate intervention to free up his initiatives stymied by lower courts. The strategy is paying off. Once a rarely used pathway to the nation's top judicial body, its emergency docket now bulges with an unprecedented volume of requests for rapid attention by the justices in clashes over Trump's far-reaching executive actions. As the Republican president tests the limits of executive power under the U.S. Constitution, Trump's administration has made 19 emergency applications to the court in less than five months, with one other such application filed by lawyers for migrants held in Texas who were on the verge of deportation. The court already has acted in 13 of these cases. It has ruled in Trump's favor nine times, partially in his favor once, against him twice and postponed action in one case that ultimately was declared moot. Trump's wins have given him the green light to implement contentious policies while litigation challenging their legality continues in lower courts. The court, for instance, let Trump revoke the temporary legal status granted for humanitarian reasons to hundreds of thousands of migrants, implement his ban on transgender people in the U.S. military and take actions to downsize the federal workforce, among other policies. The court's 6-3 conservative majority includes three justice who Trump appointed during his 2017-2021 first presidential term. Six more emergency requests by the administration remain pending at the court and one other emergency request was withdrawn. Among the requests still to be acted upon are Trump's bid to broadly enforce his order to restrict birthright citizenship, to deport migrants to countries other than their own including politically unstable South Sudan and to proceed with mass federal layoffs called "reductions in force." Emergency applications to the court involving Trump policies have averaged about one per week since he began his second term. His administration's applications this year match the total brought during Trump's Democratic predecessor Joe Biden's four years as president. "The Trump administration uses every legal basis at its disposal to implement the agenda the American people voted for," White House spokesperson Harrison Fields told Reuters. "The Supreme Court will continue to have to step in to correct erroneous legal rulings that district court judges enter solely to block the president's policies." 'STRONG CASES' The administration has "not sought Supreme Court review in all the cases it could, and part of the story may be that the government is appealing what it thinks are strong cases for it," said Sarah Konsky, director of the University of Chicago Law School's Supreme Court and Appellate Clinic. Georgetown University law professor Stephen Vladeck, who wrote a book about the court's emergency docket, said in a blog post on Thursday that the results favoring Trump should not be attributed only to the court's ideological makeup. At a time when Trump and his allies have verbally attacked judges who have impeded aspects of his sweeping agenda, there is a "very real possibility that at least some of the justices ... are worried about how much capital they have to expend in confrontations with President Trump," Vladeck wrote. The onslaught of emergency applications has diverted the attention of the justices as they near the end of the court's current term. June is usually their busiest month as they rush to finish writing opinions in major cases. For instance, they have yet to decide the fate of Tennessee's Republican-backed ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors. Among the emergency-docket cases, the court most recently on June 6 allowed Trump's Department of Government Efficiency, a key player in his drive to slash the federal workforce, broad access to personal data on millions of Americans in Social Security Administration systems and blocked a watchdog group from receiving records on DOGE operations. The court also has allowed Trump to cut millions of dollars in teacher training grants and to fire thousands of probationary federal employees. On the other side of the ledger, the court has expressed reservations about whether the administration is treating migrants fairly, as required under the Constitution's guarantee of due process. On May 16, it said procedures used by the administration to deport migrants from a Texas detention center under Trump's invocation of a 1798 law historically used only in wartime failed basic constitutional requirements. The justices also declined to let the administration withhold payment to foreign aid organizations for work already performed for the government. QUESTIONS OF TRANSPARENCY Trump turned to the emergency docket during his first term as well. His prior administration filed 41 such applications to the court. During the 16 years prior, the presidential administrations of Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Barack Obama filed just eight combined, according to Vladeck. The court has quickly decided weighty matters using the emergency docket in a way often at odds with its traditional practice of considering full case records from lower courts, receiving at least two rounds of written briefings and then holding oral arguments before rendering a detailed written ruling. It is sometimes called the "shadow docket" because cases often are acted upon without the usual level of transparency or consideration. Some recent decisions on the emergency docket have come with brief opinions explaining the court's reasoning. But typically they are issued as bare and unsigned orders offering no rationale. Konsky noted that the justices sometimes designate emergency cases for regular review with arguments and full briefing. "But in any event, the emergency docket raises complicated questions that are likely to continue to play out in the coming years," Konsky said. Among Trump's emergency applications this year, oral arguments were held only in the birthright citizenship dispute. The liberal justices, often findings themselves on the losing side, have expressed dismay. Once again "this court dons its emergency-responder gear, rushes to the scene and uses its equitable power to fan the flames rather than extinguish them," Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in a dissent in the Social Security data case. "The risk of error increases when this court decides cases -as here - with barebones briefing, no argument and scarce time for reflection," Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the teacher grants case. Conservative Justice Samuel Alito defended the emergency docket in 2021, saying there is "nothing new or shadowy" about the process and that it has wrongly been portrayed as sinister.
