​

 

Why Republicans Favor a Unitary Executive Theory

​

Historical Preference for Executive Power

• Conservative legal philosophy: Since the 1970s, many Republicans have embraced a “unitary executive” theory — the idea that the Constitution gives the president sweeping authority over the entire executive branch, with limited interference from Congress or independent agencies.

• Reaction to liberal courts and Congress: After the New Deal and Civil Rights eras, Republicans often saw the legislative and judicial branches as venues for liberal policymaking. A strong executive offered a way to push back and assert conservative priorities more directly.

 

Strategic Reasons Today

• Policy speed: The executive branch can move faster through executive orders, agency rulemaking, and administrative action than Congress, which is often gridlocked.

• Partisan control: When Republicans hold the presidency, they can use a strong executive to implement broad changes (immigration policy, deregulation, tax enforcement) without needing to pass laws through a divided or hostile Congress.

• Checks on Democratic Congresses: If Congress leans Democratic, strengthening presidential authority can block or slow legislation through vetoes, regulatory power, and judicial appointments.

 

Examples in Action

• Reagan Era: Republicans championed deregulation and stronger presidential control over the bureaucracy.

• Bush Era: Post-9/11, Republicans argued for expanded executive authority on national security and surveillance.

• Trump Era: The GOP embraced a strong executive to pursue immigration restrictions, trade tariffs, and rollback of regulations, often bypassing Congress.

 

The Paradox

• Republicans argue for states’ rights and smaller government, but often favor a powerful president when it comes to:

  • National security and foreign policy

  • Deregulation of business

  • Appointing conservative judges to shift courts long-term

​​​

 

Political Figures

 

Richard Nixon (1977 interview, after Watergate):“When the president does it, that means it is not illegal.”

→ Extreme version, often cited as the high-water mark of the strong executive view.

 

Dick Cheney (Vice President, 2005):“The President of the United States needs to have his constitutional powers unimpaired, if you will, in terms of the conduct of national security policy.”

→ Reflects the post-9/11 GOP push for broad presidential power.

 

Ronald Reagan (1983):“Only a strong president can maintain the balance of freedom around the world.”

 

→ Ties strong executive power to leadership and security.

 

Legal & Academic Voices

 

Justice Antonin Scalia (Morrison v. Olson, 1988 dissent):“The executive Power… must be vested in the President alone.”

→ Famous defense of the “unitary executive” idea.

 

Steven Calabresi (co-founder, Federalist Society):Has written extensively that the Constitution “creates a unitary executive with full control over the administration of government.”

→ This is the intellectual backbone of GOP arguments for executive power.

 

 

Framing Quotes 

 

Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 70, 1788):“Energy in the Executive is a leading character in the definition of good government.”

→ Founding-era quote often used by conservatives to justify a strong presidency.

 

 

Why Progressives Want To Limit Executive Powers

​

Historical Memory of Abuse

• Nixon and Watergate: Progressives point to Nixon’s claim that “when the president does it, that means it is not illegal” as proof of the dangers of unchecked executive power.

• Bush/Cheney Post-9/11: Expanded surveillance, torture memos, and wars launched with limited congressional approval deepened progressive skepticism of a “strong executive.”

 

Protecting Checks and Balances

• Progressives argue that Congress makes laws and the courts interpret them, so the president should not act like a lawmaker or judge.

• Limiting the executive branch helps preserve the balance of powers the framers intended.

 

Preventing “Imperial Presidency”

• Historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. (in The Imperial Presidency) warned that giving the White House too much unchecked authority erodes democracy.

• Progressives often see executive power grabs as a path toward authoritarianism.

 

Safeguarding Rights and Democracy

• Many progressive concerns center on civil liberties (spying, indefinite detention, militarized policing) and democratic participation (executive orders that bypass elected representatives).

• Limiting executive power is seen as protecting ordinary people from unilateral actions that may trample rights.

 

Consistency in Oversight

• Even when a Democrat is president, progressives often warn against relying too much on executive action.

  • Example: Climate change policies advanced by executive order can be undone by the next administration.

  • Long-term change requires Congress and durable legislation.

 

 

The Progressive Paradox

• On principle, progressives argue that the executive branch should be limited to prevent abuse of power, protect checks and balances, and guard civil liberties.

• In practice, when a Democrat is president, progressives often rely on executive action to push urgent priorities — climate change, immigration protections, student debt relief, civil rights enforcement — especially when Congress is gridlocked or controlled by conservatives.

​

Founding-Era Voices

 

James Madison (1792, in debate over executive power):“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands… may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

→ Warning that concentrating power in one branch, especially the presidency, is dangerous.

 

Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Edward Livingston, 1825):“In questions of power… let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

→ Stresses constitutional checks against executive overreach.

 

Judicial Voices

 

Justice Robert H. Jackson (Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 1952):“The Constitution diffuses power the better to secure liberty… it enjoins upon its branches separateness but interdependence, autonomy but reciprocity.”

→ Classic warning against unchecked presidential power.

 

Justice Thurgood Marshall (1989 lecture):“The Constitution does not grant the President the right to rewrite the law to suit his own convenience.”

→ Reinforces limits on executive authority.

 

Modern Critics & Scholars

Arthur Schlesinger Jr. (The Imperial Presidency, 1973):“The rise of the presidential power has been the eclipse of Congress.”

→ His book coined the phrase “Imperial Presidency” as a warning after Vietnam and Watergate.

 

Elizabeth Warren (2019 speech):“We have lived through the dangers of an imperial presidency, and we cannot let it happen again.”

→ Contemporary Democratic framing.

​

​