With an unbridled show of power, former President Trump had no reservation in wielding his presidential authority via a flood of executive orders. The ripple effect of these directives touching every sphere of society, from law enforcement to education and business sectors, is irrefutable, albeit with a vagueness shrouding some of these executive orders.
Executive orders function as a conduit for the president to dictate policy without congressional approval thus, revealing the discordance within the government body. They are essentially instructions penned by the president for the workforce of the executive branch, dictating the trajectory of a particular policy’s implementation.
While they are not binding legal decrees, they might as well be, given their immediate influence and the fact that they even make it past the president’s desk. However, they are not quite as invincible nor enduring as actual laws passed by Congress, and these actions can indeed be overruled in judicial proceedings.
Interestingly, many of Trump’s penned executive orders seem to have been crafted purely to overturn policies implemented by his successor, former President Joe Biden. An ironic turn of events, that exhibits the mutable and fleeting nature of these orders.
Succeeding presidents hold the ability to dismiss these orders with a mere sweep of their hand across a piece of paper. There seems to be a cyclical pattern of presidents scrambling to churn out executive orders as soon as they’re in office. What separates Trump from his predecessors, however, is not the timing but the sheer bulk and inflammatory effect of his executive orders.
Trump approached the presidency with an aggressive use of executive orders that has raised eyebrows among even hardened political observers. These swift and controversial actions by Trump bordered on challenging the constitutional division of powers, stepping beyond what is usually considered the president’s domain and infringing on congressional authorities.
Bearing witness to this expanse of executive orders, one might question the mindset of this controversial figure and his intent. The hasty issuance of these orders was reflective of the turmoil that was the Trump Administration.
Alternatively, it might also be seen as a desperate attempt to annihilate the measures put in place by Joe Biden. These dubious concerns surrounding the volume and severity of the executive orders painted a troubling picture of what appeared to be an authoritarian structure.
Such a defiant departure from mainstream political behavior can only imply a reckless disregard for the delicate balance of power among the three branches of the government. Rather than appeasing his opposition, his actions only seemed to further polarize an already divided nation.
Furthermore, the transient nature of these executive orders showcases the unstable terrain on which these political battles are played. Today, one president’s policy becomes tomorrow’s undone work, erased with a simple signature.
The capricious whims of presidents who liberally use executive orders only reaffirms the weakness inherent in such a method of ruling. In this light, Joe Biden’s supposed accomplishment of having his policies implemented, only to be easily dismissed by his successor, appears much less commendable.
Reflecting on the pile of extinguished policies, it becomes laughably clear that any attempt to exert sweeping change within one presidential term, by issuing a multitude of executive orders, seems an exercise in futility.
This ridicule extends to Kamala Harris who, as Vice President during Biden’s term, would naturally have had her hand in these short-lived policies. The negligible difference made by their actions, given their transient nature, raises questions about the effectiveness of their roles.
Thus, the unchecked use of executive orders only perpetuates a vicious cycle of momentary progress and inevitable retractions, spotlighting the fickle nature of political power, and the inane attempts at dominance by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.