Powers of the president of the United States
[1] The Constitution explicitly assigns the president the power to sign or veto legislation, command the armed forces, ask for the written opinion of their Cabinet, convene or adjourn Congress, grant reprieves and pardons, and receive ambassadors.
[6][7] The present-day operational command of the Armed Forces is delegated from the president to the Department of Defense and is normally exercised through its secretary.
It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces ... while that of the British king extends to the DECLARING of war and to the RAISING and REGULATING of fleets and armies, all [of] which ... would appertain to the legislature".
[12] Pursuant to the War Powers Resolution of 1973, Congress must authorize any troop deployments longer than 60 days, although that process relies on triggering mechanisms that have never been employed, rendering it ineffectual.
In 1794, Washington used his constitutional powers to assemble 12,000 militiamen to quell the Whiskey Rebellion—a conflict in western Pennsylvania involving armed farmers and distillers who refused to pay excise tax on spirits.
According to historian Joseph Ellis, this was the "first and only time a sitting American president led troops in the field", although James Madison briefly took control of artillery units in the defense of Washington D.C. during the War of 1812.
[24] The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and the ensuing Gulf War in 1991 saw George H. W. Bush assemble and lead one of the largest military coalitions of nations in modern times.
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks by al-Qaeda, the subsequent War on Terror that followed, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq due to Iraq's alleged sponsorship of terrorism and possession of weapons of mass destruction, the speed at which the Taliban and Ba'ath Party governments in both Kabul and Baghdad were toppled by an overwhelming superiority of American and allied forces defied the predictions of many military experts.
Public proclamations and international agreements are more easily tracked, as are executive orders, which have the binding force of law upon federal agencies but do not require approval of the United States Congress.
The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 was passed in response to large-scale power exercises by President Nixon.
Nonetheless, acting independently, a president can heavily influence and redirect the nation's political agenda and reshape its public policies.
"[34]: 133 This shift can be linked to other changes, in particular the polarization of political parties, increasing tendencies for congressional dysfunction, and the delegation of authority to the executive branch to implement legislative provisions.
Beyond these official powers, the U.S. president, as a leader of his political party and the United States government, holds great sway over public opinion whereby they may influence legislation.
After winning election to office, the president-elect and his transition team must begin the selection process for nominees to more than 6,000 federal positions, who will be appointed after inauguration.
[40] The appointments range from top officials at U.S. government agencies, to the White House staff, and members of the United States diplomatic corps.
These nominations require Senate confirmation, and this can provide a major stumbling block for presidents who wish to shape the federal judiciary in a particular ideological stance.
Following the assassination of President James Garfield by Charles J. Guiteau, a disgruntled office seeker, Congress instituted a merit-based civil service in which positions are filled on a nonpartisan basis.
In 2020, the Trump administration attempted to partially override this change via Executive Order, creating the job classification of Schedule F appointments.
[44][45] Since 1995, the president has been required to submit an annual report to Congress listing the name and salary of every employee of the White House Office.
[55] A claim of emergency powers was at the center of President Abraham Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus without Congressional approval in 1861.
With Chief Justice Roger Taney sitting as judge, the Federal District Court of Maryland struck down the suspension in Ex parte Merryman, although Lincoln ignored the order.
[56] President Franklin Delano Roosevelt similarly invoked emergency powers when he issued an order directing that all Japanese Americans residing on the West Coast be placed into internment camps during World War II.
PEADs undergo periodic revision, and although their current contents were not known as of 2020, previous PEADs included emergency powers to detain "alien enemies" and other "dangerous persons"; invoke various forms of martial law; authorize a general warrant permitting search and seizure of persons and property; suspend production of the Federal Register; and censor news reports.
[65] Executive privilege gives the president the ability to withhold information from the public, Congress, and the courts in national security and diplomatic affairs.
[66] George Washington first claimed privilege when Congress requested to see Chief Justice John Jay's notes from an unpopular treaty negotiation with Great Britain.
[68] Because of the vast array of presidential roles and responsibilities, coupled with a conspicuous presence on the national and international scene, political analysts have tended to place great emphasis on the president's powers.
[3][71] The Separation of Powers devised by the founding fathers was primarily designed to prevent the majority from ruling with an iron fist.
– Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.[73]Political scientists have attempted to develop theoretical approaches to describe the use and control of unilateral power, but such theories have not been clearly substantiated by empirical evidence.
Unilateral action can be seen as a strategic way of circumventing Congressional authority, or as a way to act complicitly with the tacit approval of the majority party.
Comparative perspectives suggest that factors such as partisan support, ideological polarization, and divided government, may be closely linked to unilateral policy making.
