logo
America's famed ‘checks-and-balances' governance system is failing

America's famed ‘checks-and-balances' governance system is failing

The Guardian16-07-2025
It has been said many times, but saying it appears to have no consequences: our system of checks and balances is failing. The US supreme court allowing the president effectively to abolish the Department of Education only reinforces this sense; Sonia Sotomayor, in her dissent, explicitly wrote that 'the threat to our Constitution's separation of powers is grave' – but she did not explain how to counter the threat.
The picture is complicated by the fact that what critics call 'the stranglehold the checks and balances narrative on the American political imagination' has prevented positive democratic change. Hence it is crucial to understand where the separation of powers itself needs to be kept in check and where it can play a democracy-reinforcing role. Most important, we need counterstrategies against the Trumpists' usurpation of what should remain separate powers.
While pious talk of the founders' genius in establishing 'checks and balances' is part of US civil religion and constitutional folklore, the system in fact never functioned quite as intended. The framers had assumed that individuals would jealously guard the rights of the branches they occupied. Instead, the very thing that the founders dreaded as dangerous 'factions' – what we call political parties – emerged already by the end of the 18th century; and thereby also arose the possibility of unified party government.
The other unexpected development was the increasing power of the presidency; the founders had always seen the legislature as the potential source of tyranny; instead, the second half of the 20th century saw the consolidation of an 'imperial presidency', whose powers have steadily increased as a result of various real (and often imagined) emergencies. Some jurists even blessed this development, going back to Hamilton's call for an energetic executive, and trusting that public opinion, rather than Congress or the courts, would prove an effective check on an otherwise 'unbound executive'.
The dangers posed by unified party control and a strong presidency were long mitigated by the relative heterogeneity of parties in the US; internal dissent meant that Congress would often thwart an executive's agenda. Less obviously, Congress's creation of largely independent agencies, acting on the basis of expertise, as well as inspectors general within the executive itself established an internal system of checks. It also remains true, though, that, compared with democracies such as Germany and the UK, an opposition party in the US does not have many rights (such as chairing committees) or ways of holding a chief executive accountable (just imagine if Trump had to face a weekly prime minister's question time, rather than sycophantic Fox hosts).
Most important, though, the executive itself tended to respect the powers of other branches. But Trump: not so much. In line with his governance model, of doing something plainly illegal and then seeing what happens, Trump is usurping powers reserved for the legislature. He uses money as he sees fit, not as Congress intended; he, not Congress, decides which departments are necessary. The tariff madness could be over if Congress called the bluff on a supposed 'emergency' which justifies Trump's capricious conduct of slapping countries with apparently random levies. The most egregious example is his recent threat vis-à-vis Brazil which has nothing to with trade deficits, but is meant to help his ideological ally, former president Jair Bolsonaro, escape a criminal trial for a coup attempt.
Trump is also destroying the internal checks within the executive. Inspectors general have been fired; independent agencies are made subservient to the president – in line with the theory of a 'unified executive' long promoted by conservative jurists. The US supreme court, occupied to 67% by Maga has been blessing every power grab. As the legal scholar Steve Vladeck noted, the court has granted Trump relief in every single emergency application since early April, with seven decisions – like this week's on the Department of Education – coming with no explanation at all. If this were happening in other countries, one would plainly speak of a captured court, that is to say: one subordinated to the governing party. As commentators have pointed out, it is inconceivable that this court would simply rubber-stamp a decision by a President Mamdani to fire almost everyone at the Department of Homeland Security.
Still, the main culprit is the Republican party in Congress. There is simply no credible version of 'conservatism' that justifies Trump's total concentration of power; and anyone with an ounce of understanding of the constitution would recognize the daily violations. This case can be made without buying into the separation of powers narrative criticized by the left (though what they aim at is less the existence of checks as such, but the empowerment of rural minorities in the Senate and the proliferation of veto points in the political system, such that powerful private interests can stop popular legislation).
Paradoxically, Democrats should probably make Congress even more dysfunctional than it already is: use every procedural means to grind business to a halt and explain to the public that – completely contrary to the founders' anxieties – the emasculation of the legislature is causing democracy's demise (it never hurts to slip in such gendered language to provoke the Republican masculinists).
Of course, one might question what role public opinion can really play as a check, and whether there's still such a thing at all given our fragmented media world: it never constrained the George W Bush administration's 'global war on terror' in the way that Hamilton's self-declared disciples had hoped. But it's still the best bet. After all, there is a reason why some jurists see 'we the people' as the fourth branch that ultimately makes the difference.
Jan-Werner Müller is a Guardian US columnist and a professor of politics at Princeton University
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Vance's trip to an RNC fundraiser flooded with ‘MeowTucket' protests to remind him of his cat lady gaffe
Vance's trip to an RNC fundraiser flooded with ‘MeowTucket' protests to remind him of his cat lady gaffe

The Independent

time27 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Vance's trip to an RNC fundraiser flooded with ‘MeowTucket' protests to remind him of his cat lady gaffe

Vice President JD Vance was met with 'boos' from a crowd in Nantucket, Massachusetts, who trolled him with poster-sized photos of his face in a well-known meme, inflatable couches and plush cats in what was called a 'MeowTucket' protest. The protest, promoted heavily by Amanda McGonigle, who is behind the Instagram account catsonacouch, was meant to disrupt Vance's time on the island as he headlined a Republican fundraising dinner. In keeping with the Instagram account's theme, many of the signs mocked Vance by referencing online jokes or memes about the vice president. That includes cats – a reference to Vance's controversial 'childless cat lady' comment during the campaign. Trump drew ire during the campaign for saying the country was being run by "a bunch of childless cat ladies.' There were also couches at the protest – a reference to a fictitious rumor that Vance had sex with a couch. Protestors even set up an inflatable couch underneath a massive tarp that contained an image of a popular Vance meme as a photo opportunity at 'MeowTucket.' As Vance's motorcade drove by, crowds of people yelled 'fascist' and called for Vance to leave. Signs brought to the protest said phrases such as 'In America, the law is king' and 'fascists not welcome.' To expand the mockery, protesters wore shirts with cats on them and held up cat masks to their faces. The protest was organized was several groups. McGonigle used her popular Instagram account, which is dedicated to 'fighting fascism,' along with mocking Vance, to promote 'MeowTucket.' Ahead of the protest, McGonigle also distributed thousands of ' Wanted ' posters featuring meme photos of Vance. McGonigle says the purpose of her account was to surpass Vance's number of followers, but also took on the new mission of constantly trolling him so he 'does not know a moment's peace for the next three and a half years at least.' Vance's time on Nantucket, an island known as a summer vacation haven for the wealthy, was brief. The vice president hosted a Republican National Committee fundraiser ahead of the 2026 midterm election season. Tickets to the ritzy dinner were a minimum of $100,000

Congress subpoenas Ghislaine Maxwell and plans a prison interview even after House Speaker questioned her credibility
Congress subpoenas Ghislaine Maxwell and plans a prison interview even after House Speaker questioned her credibility

The Independent

time27 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Congress subpoenas Ghislaine Maxwell and plans a prison interview even after House Speaker questioned her credibility

House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer has issued a subpoena ordering Ghislaine Maxwell, an associate of Jeffrey Epstein, to testify from prison in Florida. Comer set Maxwell's deposition date for August 11 as the Trump administration faces mounting criticism over the Epstein files. Maxwell is set to be interviewed at the Federal Correctional Institution Tallahassee, where she is currently serving a 20-year sentence for her role in helping Epstein recruit, groom, and abuse young girls. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche also announced Tuesday he has contacted Maxwell's attorneys to set up a meeting with her. Comer said the Justice Department is 'cooperating and will help facilitate the deposition at the prison.' Some have called for Maxwell to testify to shed light on if any other people were involved with Epstein's actions. The subpoena comes after Speaker of the House Mike Johnson questioned whether Maxwell's testimony will be truthful. 'If they see fit to bring in Ghislaine Maxwell for testimony, that's fine,' Johnson told reporters Wednesday. 'I will note the obvious concern, the caveat that Chairman Comer and I and everyone has, that, can she be counted on to tell the truth? Is she a credible witness?' 'I mean, this is a person who's been sentenced to many, many years in prison for terrible, unspeakable, conspiratorial acts and acts against innocent young people,' he added. 'I mean, can we trust what she's going to say, even if she raises her hand and says that she'll testify under oath?' Maxwell's attorney, David Markus, told The Independent he understands the 'general concern' that Congress should vet witnesses, but says Johnson's worries are 'unfounded' in this case. 'If Ms. Maxwell agrees to testify before Congress and not take the 5th—and that remains a big if—she would testify truthfully, as she always has said she would and as she will with Mr. Blanche,' Markus wrote. 'The truth should not be feared or preemptively dismissed. No previous prosecutor from the Southern District of New York or elsewhere has had the courage to meet with Ms. Maxwell and ask her these important questions.' 'As for the Congressional subpoena, Ms. Maxwell is taking this one step at a time,' he added. 'She looks forward to her meeting with the Department of Justice, and that discussion will help inform how she proceeds.' Johnson said the House will go on its annual summer recess beginning Wednesday. The break comes as Representatives Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna — a Republican and Democrat, respectively — lead a charge to force a vote that would compel the Justice Department to release more information on Epstein. Earlier this month, the Justice Department and FBI released a memo claiming that Epstein did not have a client list, even though Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested it was on her desk months prior. The memo also confirmed the financier died by suicide while in jail in August 2019, after years of conspiracy theories surrounding his death. The memo stated there would be 'no further disclosure' related to the Epstein investigation. Trump has defended Bondi and his administration amid backlash from both sides of the aisle. He also directed Bondi to begin the process of unsealing grand jury testimony related to the Epstein investigation. The Justice Department has since requested that the testimony be unsealed. Judges in Florida and New York rejected the requests Wednesday.

FEMA chief rejects criticism, calls Texas floods response 'a model' for dealing with disaster
FEMA chief rejects criticism, calls Texas floods response 'a model' for dealing with disaster

The Independent

time27 minutes ago

  • The Independent

FEMA chief rejects criticism, calls Texas floods response 'a model' for dealing with disaster

The acting administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency is pushing back on criticisms of the federal response to the central Texas floods that killed at least 136 people earlier this month. 'I can't see anything we did wrong,' David Richardson told a House panel of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on Wednesday. He called the relationship between state and federal agencies 'a model for how disasters should be handled.' Lawmakers used the hearing about improvements to FEMA disaster response to address reports that FEMA support was impaired by bureaucratic delays that slowed the deployment of urban search and rescue teams and left the agency's call centers unstaffed, which Richardson denied. The response "brought the maximum amount of capability to bear in Texas at the right time and the right place,' he said. Richardson's appearance came after a wave of criticism and fallout over the response, including the resignation Monday of FEMA's urban search and rescue leader. President Donald Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem have touted the robust federal support for Texas despite their past support for eliminating FEMA. Reports of delays on the ground denied The acting administrator denied reports that FEMA urban search-and-rescue teams were delayed over 72 hours because of a new rule imposed by Noem that she must personally approve any contract of $100,000 or more. Richardson said a Texas-based FEMA task force was on the ground on July 4, along with other Homeland Security assets like the Coast Guard and Customs and Border Protection, and that additional support came within '24 hours' of being requested. Rep. Greg Stanton, D-Ariz., pushed back on FEMA's readiness, asking why more of the 28 FEMA urban search-and-rescue teams located around the country were not on standby ahead of receiving a request from the state of Texas. 'It haunts me that we could have had more urban search and rescue pre-positioned in place,' said Stanton. 'That was a choice.' The leader of FEMA's urban search-and-rescue effort, Ken Pagurek, expressed frustration with the delays to colleagues before resigning Monday, according to CNN. In response to Pagurek's resignation, a DHS spokesperson told The Associated Press, 'It is laughable that a career public employee, who claims to serve the American people, would choose to resign over our refusal to hastily approve a six-figure deployment contract without basic financial oversight." The Texas Division of Emergency Management did not respond to a request for comment on whether search-and-rescue efforts were impacted by delayed deployment of the FEMA teams. Richardson also denied a report from The New York Times that 84% of calls to FEMA went unanswered on July 7, three days after the July 4 floods, because Noem let lapse contract renewals with outside call centers. The contracts were renewed July 10, according to The Times. 'The vast majority of phone calls were answered. There was never a lapse in the contract,' said Richardson, echoing Noem's statements that the report was 'fake news.' Richardson defended his absence from the ground efforts in Texas, saying he worked from Washington, D.C., 'to kick down the doors of bureaucracy' and denying suggestions that Trump or Noem told him to stand down. He did not visit Texas until July 12. FEMA's fate is still in question Since the Texas floods, Trump has deflected questions about FEMA's fate. In June, he said he wanted to begin 'phasing out' FEMA after the hurricane season 'to wean off of FEMA and bring it to the state level.' Trump has been criticized for delaying decisions on disaster declaration requests, causing some states to wait as long as two months for approval to receive assistance to repair public infrastructure or help survivors. Lawmakers pressed Richardson on more general issues of FEMA reform as well, including concerns over long overdue preparedness grant funding, flood insurance and rules about how much financial assistance survivors can receive. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers asked about the fate of the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, which Trump canceled earlier this year. The grants supplied hundreds of millions of dollars in disaster mitigation funding. Twenty states are now suing the administration over the loss of funds. On Tuesday, Trump approved disaster declaration requests for Michigan, Oregon, Indiana, Kansas, West Virginia, Missouri and New Mexico and expanded assistance in Kentucky. Rep. Bob Onder, R-Mo., asked Richardson why it took a month for his state to get a disaster declaration. 'My constituents were frustrated by how long it takes to get temporary housing and debris removal assistance," Onder said. Richardson referred back to Texas' declaration request: 'We turned that around within just a couple hours.' A Trump-appointed FEMA review council is in the process of crafting recommendations to the president on changes to the agency. Noem, who co-chairs the council, told its members five days after the Texas floods that FEMA 'needs to be eliminated as it exists today and remade as a responsive agency.' Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Wash., said he and Rep. Sam Graves, R-Mo., would introduce the bipartisan Fixing Emergency Management for Americans Act this week, which would make FEMA an independent, Cabinet-level agency, incentivize states to prioritize resilience and improve aid for survivors. 'We don't need to wait for a FEMA review council," said Larsen. 'We've been reviewing FEMA for a long time.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store