In the wake of President Trump’s recent comment that he has “total” authority to re-open the United States from the coronavirus pandemic, criticism of the President has been reignited. This comment seemed to contradict statements from the White House that claimed the President is following the advice provided by medical and health experts in considering the re-opening timeline. It also raised concerns that the Trump administration could be headed in a more authoritarian direction.
The Trump administration has aggressively sought to silence critical voices regarding the President’s handling of the pandemic, including the firing of the State Department Inspector General Steve Linick, who his predecessor had appointed in 2013. In this context, the comment raised further questions about Trump’s potential misuse of power.
Some legal scholars have argued that Trump does not in fact have absolute authority in this situation, according to the constitutional system of federalism, which allows states to set and enforce their own restrictions. Trump supporters, however, have suggested that such criticism is unfounded and overlooks the fact that the President has authority to act in a national emergency.
It is troubling that the President would make such a comment, given the potential implications for our system of government. His stance is worrisome for its disregard of the importance of separation of powers and the need for all levels of government to cooperate in responding to this unique crisis. Moreover, it highlights the dangers of unchecked executive authority and highlights the importance of reinforcing of safeguards to prevent its misuse.
With elections just around the corner and the focus turning to the fate of the Trump administration, it is important to keep a near watch on the President’s statements and actions. The implications of the President’s comment are significant and deserve continued scrutiny in order to protect the rule of law and preserving civil liberties.
In the wake of President Trump’s recent comment that he has “total” authority to re-open the United States from the coronavirus pandemic, criticism of the President has been reignited. This comment seemed to contradict statements from the White House that claimed the President is following the advice provided by medical and health experts in considering the re-opening timeline. It also raised concerns that the Trump administration could be headed in a more authoritarian direction.
The Trump administration has aggressively sought to silence critical voices regarding the President’s handling of the pandemic, including the firing of the State Department Inspector General Steve Linick, who his predecessor had appointed in 2013. In this context, the comment raised further questions about Trump’s potential misuse of power.
Some legal scholars have argued that Trump does not in fact have absolute authority in this situation, according to the constitutional system of federalism, which allows states to set and enforce their own restrictions. Trump supporters, however, have suggested that such criticism is unfounded and overlooks the fact that the President has authority to act in a national emergency.
It is troubling that the President would make such a comment, given the potential implications for our system of government. His stance is worrisome for its disregard of the importance of separation of powers and the need for all levels of government to cooperate in responding to this unique crisis. Moreover, it highlights the dangers of unchecked executive authority and highlights the importance of reinforcing of safeguards to prevent its misuse.
With elections just around the corner and the focus turning to the fate of the Trump administration, it is important to keep a near watch on the President’s statements and actions. The implications of the President’s comment are significant and deserve continued scrutiny in order to protect the rule of law and preserving civil liberties.
