How Trump's 'Emergency' Powers Could Become Permanent
The office of dictator was created in the early Roman Republic, when it granted a single person—a prominent and trusted citizen—immense power in times of emergency. The dictator effectively became the commander in chief of Rome's forces, imposing martial law to address external or internal threats that imperiled the city. Despite the negative connotation of the word today, the dictator did not rule in perpetuity but rather was typically appointed for a six-month period. Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus, later an inspiration to George Washington, was endowed with this authority three times, did his duty, and returned to being a farmer afterward.
Yet well-intentioned legislative measures can become corrupted through time and the demands of political expediency. In 121 BCE, facing a populist uprising from Gaius Gracchus, the Roman Senate issued a Senatus consultum ultimum, or 'final decree of the Senate,' effectively suspending due process procedures so that the tribune could be seized and executed without a trial. The decree also, rather conveniently, shielded the senators themselves from any responsibility for actions taken during the crisis. Less than 40 years later, Sulla would use the same legislative procedure to entrench himself as dictator for life, crushing his enemies and pushing through his own agenda. Julius Caesar would do the same following his civil war against Pompey the Great, marking the end of the Roman Republic and paving the way for rule by emperor.
A couple of millennia later, and half a world away, Donald Trump is taking steps in that direction.
There is no specific mention of emergency powers in the U.S. Constitution, but many scholars have argued that such powers are implied by the structure of the executive branch, and courts have generally been willing to acknowledge the legitimacy of the president to assume them, especially when granted prior authority by Congress. Abraham Lincoln assumed emergency powers when he briefly suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War, which the Constitution expressly permits. Woodrow Wilson was the first president to formally declare a national emergency, in his case to address our maritime shipping inadequacies as we were poised to enter World War I. FDR issued three national emergency proclamations—one to stop the bank run in his first days in office and two related to World War II.
In 1976, Congress passed the National Emergencies Act, giving presidents broad emergency powers. Initially, Congress included a check on this authority, including in the bill a provision that it could rein in an emergency declaration by the president through a vote. But the Supreme Court overturned that check in the 1983 case of INS v. Chadha, while leaving in place the president's largely unrestrained emergency powers.
Presidents have taken advantage of this: Ronald Reagan used the NEA six times during his eight years in office, including to impose sanctions on apartheid South Africa. Bill Clinton used it a whopping 18 times to do things like stop Iran from enriching uranium and thwart Middle Eastern terrorism. George W. Bush declared an emergency 14 times, in every instance against specific foreign entities related to terrorism or antidemocratic efforts in nations like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon. Barack Obama acted similarly, and so did Trump, predominantly, in his first administration, with the exception of his use of it to bypass Congress in the construction of a Southern border wall. Joe Biden was accused of taking emergency powers too far, as well, when he tried to apply them to his plan for student loan debt relief in the wake of Covid, but beyond that he used this congressionally granted authority in typical ways: to address actual and identifiable threats.
Since retaking office, Trump has declared eight national emergencies in just a few short months. He's used the NEA to militarize the Southern border against 'invasion' and to enact tariffs against the entire world. He declared a national energy emergency, even though no such emergency exists, so that he can push through more fossil fuel permits.
All of these 'emergencies' under the NEA come in addition to Trump's invocation of the arcane 1798 Alien Enemies Act, which the administration has used to violate the due process rights of undocumented immigrants and sentence them to a lifetime of detention in El Salvador. Elon Musk's DOGE farce claimed the necessity to act with similar impulsiveness and disregard for workers' rights in its chain-saw approach to cutting government: We need to move fast and break things because, Musk has asserted, the 'waste' is extraordinary and the threat imminent.
Trump will likely go considerably further. He's bandied about the idea of using the 1807 Insurrection Act to use American troops to deal with a 'rebellion' within the United States. For now, that idea was rejected based on the recommendations of Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, but Trump could return to it should protests continue to spread throughout the country or if he feels his draconian anti-immigration policies are being undermined.
And recently, Trump's top henchman Stephen Miller has mused about suspending habeas corpus for undocumented immigrants, depriving them of any due process rights whatsoever. 'The Constitution is clear, and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land, that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended at a time of invasion,' said Miller, a senior White House adviser. 'So I would say that's an action we're actively looking at.' Miller further posited that it would be a decision left solely up to the administration, which 'radical rogue judges' would not be able to overrule. Essentially, the administration would act as prosecutor, judge, and executioner.
What would stop such an abolition of basic freedoms from extending to U.S. citizens? If Trump (or Miller by proxy) decide that certain U.S. citizens are hampering their 'national security' efforts, they could potentially justify suspending habeas corpus for them as well. It would be a big step if they tried it now, but they seem to be inching in that direction—and would be enabled by the Supreme Court ruling in Chadha and a Congress controlled by a feeble, impotent Republican Party.
Despite slow-walking Trump's insurrection trial and granting extraordinary powers and independence to the president in Trump v. United States, even Chief Justice John Roberts appears to be starting to recognize the dangers of granting unlimited power to the White House. On Monday, he told a group of Georgetown Law students that the rule of law is 'endangered,' evidently not perceiving his own role in its decimation. He expressed fear that judges doing their duty would be maligned and perhaps impeached. It's hard to figure that Roberts isn't directly reacting to Miller's philosophy on executive power as it relates to the courts.
In the aftermath of the 2008 global financial crash, Obama chief of staff and future Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel famously said, 'Never let a crisis go to waste.' Some have called this 'Rahm's rule': the recognition that every crisis brings opportunities to do things that might otherwise have been difficult or impossible. Trump and Miller have exploited and expanded this notion, developing their own rule of governance—what may be called the 'Trump doctrine.' The strategy is so simple as to be barbaric, as crude in its methods as it is cruel in its execution: Create a continual state of crisis and turmoil, allowing the president to assume expansive emergency powers—a backdoor method of achieving a unitary executive and possibly going much further.
Crises lend themselves to authoritarian rule, and often in the aftermath it's extraordinarily difficult to return to republican government. Trump has created a permanent crisis state. Yet the real crisis began when tens of millions of Americans made the mistake of putting a fascist back in office after his first attempt to overthrow the government.
Hashtags

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


The Hill
17 minutes ago
- The Hill
Freedom Caucus warns it will ‘not accept' Senate changes on green energy tax credits
The conservative House Freedom Caucus said on Friday that it would 'not accept' changes that 'water down' its cuts to green energy tax credits as the Senate weighs whether to alter the legislation. The House version of the 'big, beautiful bill' would make drastic changes to tax cuts for low-carbon energy sources passed in the Democrats' 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Climate-friendly energy projects, including wind and solar, would only be able to qualify for the credits under the House bill if they begin construction within 60 days of the bill's enactment. This brief window would likely make many projects ineligible for the credits, and is expected to significantly hamstring the development of new renewable power. In a post on social media on Friday, the Freedom Caucus warned the Senate against loosening that restriction or others included in the bill. 'We want to be crystal clear: if the Senate attempts to water down, strip out, or walk back the hard-fought spending reductions and IRA Green New Scam rollbacks achieved in this legislation, we will not accept it,' said the post, which was attributed to the Freedom Caucus's board. 'The House Freedom Caucus Board will stand united holding the line. The American people didn't send us here to cave to the swamp — they sent us here to change it,' they added. The Senate has been widely expected to consider changes that could slow the rapid elimination of the tax credit passed under the House version of Trump's 'big beautiful bill.' Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Thom Tillis (N.C.), Jerry Moran (Kan.) and John Curtis (Utah) released a letter warning against a 'full scale' repeal of the tax credits. Senate Republicans can only afford three defections and pass their bill. On Friday, a group of 13 House GOP moderates released a letter calling on Senate leadership 'to substantively and strategically improve clean energy tax credit provisions' in the legislation. 'We believe the Senate now has a critical opportunity to restore common sense and deliver a truly pro-energy growth final bill that protects taxpayers while also unleashing the potential of U.S. energy producers, manufacturers, and workers,' said the letter, which was led by Reps. Jen Kiggans (R-Va.) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.). Altogether, the letters illustrate what could be a tough task ahead of the Republican leadership as they look to find a measure that will keep at least 50 senators on board and appease the House. Emily Brooks contributed.


Axios
19 minutes ago
- Axios
Scoop: LaCivita signs up for Florida Senate race
Senior Trump political adviser Chris LaCivita is joining a super PAC bolstering Florida Sen. Ashley Moody in next year's midterm election, Axios has learned. Why it matters: LaCivita gives Moody, who has filled the seat formerly held by now-Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the imprimatur of support from President Trump's orbit. Moody was appointed in January to the seat by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who faced off against Trump in a bitter battle for the Republican nomination in 2024. Moody, a former Florida attorney general, is seeking a full term in 2026. She has yet to attract a serious primary challenger. Zoom in: Moody has also brought on Tony Fabrizio, another chief strategist on Trump's 2024 campaign. LaCivita and Fabrizio are playing key roles in steering Trump's cash-flush political operation. LaCivita is working for several other GOP candidates running next year, including Texas Sen. John Cornyn and Michigan Senate hopeful Mike Rogers.

USA Today
21 minutes ago
- USA Today
Live: Kilmar Abrego Garcia charged with human smuggling after return from El Salvador
Live: Kilmar Abrego Garcia charged with human smuggling after return from El Salvador Show Caption Hide Caption Kilmar Abrego Garcia neighborhood in El Salvador USA TODAY visited Kilmar Abrego Garcia's home neighborhood in El Salvador to get a better sense of who the man is. Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Maryland man whose deportation to an infamous prison in El Salvador made his story a flashpoint in President Donald Trump's immigration policy, faces human trafficking charges after hewas returned to the United States, Attorney General Pam Bondi said. Abrego Garcia made more than 100 trips to move illegal immigrants across the United States, Bondi said. "Thousands of illegal aliens were smuggled," she said. Abrego Garcia "traded the innocence of minor children for profit," Bondi said. Abrego Garcia was indicted on two charges of unlawful transport of undocumented immigrants for financial gain. The indictment alleges Abrego Garcia also transported narcotics on more than 100 trips between Texas and Maryland. He also smuggled minors, court documents allege. 'Abrego Garcia… transported undocumented aliens in an unsafe manner, including using reconfigured vehicles with after-market unattached seating rows, and they transported children on the floorboards of vehicles in order to maximize profits,' the indictment alleges. -Nick Penzenstadler Abrego Garcia was sent to El Salvador's CECOT mega prison on March 15 in a move officials would later call an administrative "error." A 2019 court order barred his deportation to his native country due to security concerns. Abrego Garcia will face federal human trafficking charges after a two-count indictment was filled in Tennessee in May. "We should treat any of these charges with a high degree of suspicion and he should get a fair hearing in court because he isn't getting one in the court of public opinion,' said Chris Newman, Legal Director at the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, which represents Abrego Garcia's family. Newman and Rep. Glenn Ivey, D-Maryland, recently attempted to meet with Abrego Garcia in El Salvador and were denied access. Senator Chris Van Hollen, D-Maryland, met with Abrego Garcia briefly in El Salvador. "For months the Trump Administration flouted the Supreme Court and our Constitution," Van Hollen said in statement issued June 6. "Today, they appear to have finally relented to our demands for compliance with court orders and with the due process rights afforded to everyone in the United States. As I have repeatedly said, this is not about the man, it's about his constitutional rights – and the rights of all. The Administration will now have to make its case in the court of law, as it should have all along.' What does Abrego Garcia's indictment say? A federal grand jury handed down the indictment on May 21 in Nashville, according to court records. The indictment was sealed until government lawyers filed to open it on Friday, June 6. "From in or around 2016 through in or around 2025, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garica and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, conspired to bring undocumented aliens to the United States from countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Ecuador, and elsewhere," the indictment reads. "Ultimately passing through Mexico before crossing into Texas." The indictment alleges Abrego Garcia is a member and associate of the MS-13 gang, a claim his family has denied. The indictment alleges Abrego Garcia also transported firearms illegally purchased in Texas for distribution and resale in Maryland. It alleges Abrego Garcia would take undocumented immigrants' cell phones while being transported to ensure they would not contact anyone during the trip. If convicted, Abrego Garcia would face 10 years in U.S. prison and a $250,000 fine.