Unitary executive theory
Interpretation of the US Constitution regarding presidential power / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In American law, unitary executive theory is "an expansive interpretation of presidential power that aims to centralize greater control over the government in the White House."[1] The concept often comes up in jurisprudential disagreements about the president's ability to remove employees within the executive branch; transparency and access to information; discretion over the implementation of new laws; and the ability to influence agencies' rule-making.[2] There is disagreement about the doctrine's strength and scope, with more expansive versions of the theory becoming the focus of modern political debate. These expansive versions are controversial for both constitutional and practical reasons.[3][4][5]
The theory is largely based on Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution,[6] which "vests" "the executive Power" of the United States in the president.[7][8] Critics debate over how much power the vesting clause gives a president[9][10] and point to the other clauses in the Constitution that provide checks and balances on executive power. For instance, some argue that the Commander in Chief Clause would be rendered effectively redundant if the founders intended the wording to be interpreted as a unitary executive.[11] Others argue that even the King of Great Britain at the time of the founding did not have the unitary control that some proponents argue he had when justifying an expansion of presidential power.[12]
Since its inception, the President of the United States has exercised significant authority over the executive branch, with some exceptions, including independent agencies such as the Federal Reserve, and independent personnel such as special counsels.[13][verification needed] These limits on unitary executive power can be created by the legislative branch via Congress passing legislation, or by the judicial branch via Supreme Court decisions. Since the founding of the country, positions independent of the executive have included Comptroller, Postmaster General and the Sinking Fund Commission.[13] The Reagan administration was the first presidential administration to cite unitary executive theory. It then entered public discourse with the George W. Bush administration and found a strong advocate in Donald Trump.[14] Presidents of both parties tend to view the idea that they should have more power more favorably when in office.[14]
Beyond disputing its constitutionality,[15][16][17][11] common criticisms include the ideas that the theory could lead to poor outcomes, including more corruption, less qualified employees,[18][19][20] and democratic backsliding.[21][22][23][24] Some critics point to countries where similar changes to a more unitary executive have resulted in democratic backsliding, or to the vast majority of democracies (including U.S. states and local governments) that give their executive leader less power.[25][23][26][27]