As President Trump has entered office he has signed several executive orders. As time has gone on presidents have increasingly issued more and more of these orders. A number of which have been struck down as unconstitutional. Trump’s orders are an order of magnitude above anyone before him recently both in quantity and in scope. There is no argument that presidents of both parties have abused this power as well as the pardon power. However, a number of these orders are in direct contradiction to the Constitution or federal law. Many will be challenged in court, and I believe only a few will remain standing in any way. A number of Americans are weary of many of these orders.
Orders on Executive Branch: One order essentially reinstates what was called “Schedule F” which is an attempt to place federal employees essentially more at will of the President. Keep in mind that this is not a black and white issue. Executive employees do enact the policies of the president. However, they are also bound by federal law and of course the Constitution as well as funded by Congress. There has been serious discussion and serious doubt that civil service job protection can be overridden by the president by executive order. The executive order runs directly up against the Lloyd-La Follette Act of 1912 and The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (What is Due Process in Civil Service Employment; 5, 9-10) stating specific requirements for Civil Service Termination. The Supreme Court has also had their say on this (What is Due Process in Civil Service Employment; 19-25). Despite the talk that we here about these employees, these are civil servants. There is little to no evidence shown that these everyday employees have abused their power by breaking law. This has already gone to the courts, as will other issues like it.
Immigration: The President arguably has significantly more power when it comes to immigration. With regards to increased deportations and border measures there is little law contradicting the President’ ability. The term “invasion” has been used. But invasion may have a more narrow military meaning legally relating to armed military/insurgent invasion or terrorism. The prevention of terrorist attack is a motive for immigration enforcement. However that label as applied to all illegal immigration seems dubious at best.
Another issue is the scope of this is so large as to invite a high risk of repeated error. Detaining and harassing legal temporary workers and U.S. Citizens could be an issue. These people will have a right to protest in these cases if they get consistent. Hopefully this does not happen. The other problem is that you execute a policy with an eye toward reduced long-term risk. The way this is being done in places of work, as well as the expansion of Guantanamo Bay, would bring a demand for greater accountability. This could also create greater problems with illegal immigration as they are trying to solve them. There are security issues with immigration, all of which can be solved with immigration reform and increased border security and restrictions. Eventually bills will have to be produced and implemented.
This brings us to Birthright Citizenship. Which is one of the immigration orders. This has already been blocked, but President Trump may challenge it. The intent passing the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court Cases of Wong Kim Ark in 1898 and Plyer vs. Doe in 1983, when taken together, state that the children born in this country are citizens whether their parents were legal or illegal. The other argument is that there is some wiggle room in the phrasing of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th amendment. However, deportation requires that the illegal immigrant be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and its laws. Which makes it difficult to argue how one could legally partition that jurisdiction. There is also large agreement that the only way to change this Amendment is to go through the amendment process. This has been brought up to stop what is called “birther tourism” or illegal border crossings with the intent to give birth on U.S. soil. Again, something that can be addressed with stricter visa/border restriction and enforcement.
Pardoning of January 6 Rioters: The one power that President Trump has exercised that is complete and absolute is the Pardon power. He has used it to pardon the January 6 rioters. Including members of groups like the proud boys. This power has continually been abused by presidents. I do not agree with Biden’s pardon of his son after he was tried and unanimously convicted by a jury of his peers. Nor do I agree with President Trumps pardoning of the people who stormed the capital that day, some of who are simply criminal gangsters based on what they do and how they operate, others of which were also convicted of crimes unanimously by a jury of their peers. Law enforcement officials died. Any other narrative associated with this incident has not stood up to a true test of scrutiny or court evaluation. Only 20% of Americans support this decision.
Of course no one knows 100% what the Supreme court will do if and when these cases get to them. But many of these issues are on solid legal grounding. Ultimately I believe that the issues we face are best vetted and produced by processes found in the Constitution and federal law.