The executive order denotes how a sitting president of (most) democratic countries issues a federal or national directive. Presidents utilize the order to manage the national operations, depending on the country’s nature (Johns 100). Executive orders play a fundamental role in enforcing laws by the head of state. Most occupiers of the Oval office have continued to use the power more often and in unprecedented manners. This paper aims at analyzing the historical aspects of presidential executive orders, their main transformation, and concerns that bother people.
Background
The presidency has the primary responsibility of coordinating businesses of government. The role mainly entails technical leadership, focusing on the formulation of policies, making decisions, and monitoring other entities’ performance in the public sector (Christenson and Kriner 1074). The use of executive orders by presidents in the U.S. has over the years grown to become a norm. For instance, most presidents had often used the privilege to organize the way their government functions. However, the application of executive orders has likewise elicited a heated debate as many people argue that such powers create a very powerful president who may be tempted to ignore the Constitution (Konopasek 181). There are others who support the use of executive orders, especially when the government needs to meet its goals.
In the U.S., almost all presidents have issued an executive order, except President Henry Harrison. Such directives have often varied over time in terms of substance and also in their setting (Warber et al. 117). The first-ever directive was issued on June 8, 1789, by George Washington when addressing the federal department heads. It instructed the departmental heads to impress the president with comprehensive, straight to point, and specific ideas of the U.S. affairs in their fields.
The emancipation proclamation is often viewed as a significant executive order in the U.S. It was issued by Abraham Lincoln on September 22, 1862, during the Civil War period (Woolley and Peters 381). It directed those held as slaves to rebel against the southern states that were exploiting them for labor services. Most of the executive orders remained unannounced in the U.S. before the early 1990s (Johns 111). They were also undocumented and viewed only by the agencies which needed to implement them. Executive orders mostly depend on the system of government a country has (Konopasek 193). The U.S., for example, has a democratic form of government, where the right of the president to issue an executive order is enshrined in the federal constitution. The presidency uses the authority to demonstrate and execute the powers of a commander-in-chief. However, the executive order cannot guarantee or give new powers or privileges to the presidency’s institution.
Executive Orders since 2000
In the U.S., executive orders have been used by both the Democratic and the Republican presidents. Most of the directives have often been utilized by various administrations to either promulgate certain laws or facilitate public policy initiatives that circumvent the appropriate lawmaking processes (Warber et al. 113). Some of the presidential directives issued since 2000 include the restriction of public acquisition and access to former presidents’ papers by George W. Bush in the year 2000. President Bush also applied the privilege to encourage innovation through manufacturing in 2004. Most of the orders issued were therefore meant to streamline government operations.
President Barack Obama also applied several administrative actions to organize his administration. On January 13, 2017, Obama introduced an executive order outlining the succession procedure within the Department of Justice by defining the persons next in line in the event of a vacancy. He also dispensed an order that granted amnesty to illegal immigrants, thus allowing them to have work permits in the United States. The directive was, however, countered by a lawsuit filed by state governments prompting the courts to temporarily block its implementation. The matter is still awaiting a final ruling due to its sensitivity. The Trump administration is not different from the previous ones when it concerns the application of executive orders. President Trump will probably be remembered as a leader who issued many executive orders during his time, including building a border wall between Mexico and the U.S. Their usage by previous presidents since 2000 proves how the executive continues to show its power.
The Current Debate over Executive Orders
The increased use of exclusive privileges and other directives by the president remains a significant challenge in most countries. Controversy continues to grow with regards to the nature and implications of a president having such immense powers. The presidential authority has of late been felt when it comes to functions related to lawmaking. Most political analysts and constitutional experts opposed to such powers opine that it is usually difficult to overturn such challenges after they are issued. For anyone to block any executive order from being implemented, he or she must do it through the courts or convince Congress to vote against it. Others state that the power to issue executive orders has enabled presidents to easily by-pass many legislation processes.
In conclusion, recent years have seen the increased application of executive orders by various heads across the world, including the United States. It is a privilege that has enabled presidents to show their power in thumping their authority as commanders-in-chief by circumnavigating lawmakers who are often accused of derailing the government agenda with sinister motives. While some political scientists may want such constitutional rights to be scrapped, the truth is that the powers are critical in helping the ruling administration delivers its promises to the electorate.
Works Cited
Christenson, Dino P., and Douglas L. Kriner. “Does Public Opinion Constrain Presidential Unilateralism?” The American Political Science Review, vol. 113, no. 4, 2019, pp. 1071–1077. .
Johns, Andrew L. “Declining the ‘Invitation to Struggle’Congressional Complicity in the Rise of the Imperial Presidency.” Pacific Historical Review, vol. 89, no. 1, 2020, pp. 97–130.
Konopasek, Seth. “Examining the Constitutionality of Executive Orders: DACA, DAPA, and the Take Care Clause.” Brigham Young University Prelaw Review, vol. 32, no. 1, 2018, pp. 179–195.
Warber, Adam L., et al. “Landmark Executive Orders: Presidential Leadership Through Unilateral Action.” Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 48, no. 1, 2018, pp. 110–126.
Woolley, John T., and Gerhard Peters. “The Contemporary Presidency: Do Presidential Memo Orders Substitute for Executive Orders? New Data.” Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 47, no. 2, 2017, pp. 378–393.