Essay about Presidential Power

Most of the specifications for the executive branch in the Constitution, other than how he is to be elected, have to deal with the interactions between Congress and the President. The president can (fill in the blank) but only if (this part) of Congress approves. The powers of the president have been interpreted widely so that he has more power than I believe the Framers intended. They wanted him to be able to check Congress with veto power and be the head of the military. However, I think that presidents nowadays have too much power. They are active in trying force their policy agenda through Congress, manage foreign relations, and act as the administrative head of the entire nation. The textbook lays it out well in, "The vast size of the executive branch and the number and complexity of decisions that must be made each day pose a challenge for the White House.” (316) In order to deal with the stresses put on the executive branch, there are thousands of employees that work to give the president the information that he needs to make decisions. He has advisors, cabinet members, legislative liaisons; the list goes on and on, but he is the person who actually gets to make all of the choices. The President is limited in some ways and given more power in other ways by the structure laid out for him in the Constitution, and evolved to be what it is now.

This branch, however, does not have all the power. There is a system put into place by the founding fathers called checks and balances. This system was though up with one goal in mind, to allow near equal flow of power

Another very notable role of the President also outlined in Article II. Section 2. of the Constitution and reads, “He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court(http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html). It essentially gives the President power to make treaties with foreign nations however, two-thirds of Congress must be in agreement with the decision. Although the President, or the Executive Branch can be interpreted as the most authoritative arm of government, its powers are still limited and restricted by the process of checks and balances. Each branch of government has some governance over the other two divisions. For instance, just as it is outlined above, the President can nominate Ambassadors and Judges of the Supreme Court but the decision must be upheld by Congress. In other words, under the "Advice and Consent clause the appointed member must be sworn in by the Senate. Again, this is an example of how the system of checks and balances limits the powers of the President.

If the President is suspected of unlawful acts, he can be impeached, or tried by the Senate for misusing his power. The Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. If he is found guilty, he can be punished but his sentence can be no more than being thrown out of office and being forbidden to hold any government office. Furthermore, if the President wants to spend money, his request must pass through Congress, since it has control over spending. Lastly, Congress can re-pass a bill that was vetoed by the President. Congress also has checks and balances against itself. The President can veto a bill from Congress, and although Congress can override a veto, obtaining a two-thirds vote to do so is very difficult. Public speeches by the President may also concern the public with an issue, putting pressure on Congress to act upon it. The Judicial branch exerts control over the other two by deciding whether or not actions made by the President or Congress, i.e., laws are constitutional.

The president also has the power Veto laws passed by congress. The president has the power to make political appointment and negotiate treaties with foreign countries, however this power also requires the approval of the senate. The President is responsible for making a for appointing his cabinet and federal judges. The president is capable of calling congress in session and the power to adjourn congress.

persuade. He has many options in a lot of areas, though one of them is

The President of the United States is often considered the most powerful elected official in the world. The President leads a nation of great wealth and military strength. Presidents have often provided decisive leadership in times of crisis, and they have shaped many important events in history. The President has many roles and performs many duties. As chief executive, the President makes sure that federal laws are enforced. As commander in chief of the nation's armed forces, the President is responsible for national defense. As foreign policy director, the President determines United States relation with other nations. As legislative leader, the President recommends new laws and works to win their passage. As

does not have a large reign over any other branch in government. Though the President is influential, he does not have the ability to control the Judicial or Legislative branch, due to checks and balances. The President does not even have the equal power of a governor with respects to pardons. The President has the ability to delay any trial, or excuse any criminal except in cases of impeachment, treason, or murder. A governor may use pardons in these cases. This disability allows for a more stable and equal Judicial system, less likely to be corrupted. An elected monarch would surely be able to excuse any prisoner he wished, which is not the case for the president. The President also can appoint federal judges and ministers, but only with the senate’s approval. This further proves the lower extent of power beheld by the President compared to a monarch, as the senate ultimately decides which ministers and judges will be appointed. The President has a unique part of the Legislative, which is the veto as stated previously. This allows him to check, but not obstruct, the legislative process. Ultimately, the President has minimal control over the other branches, than an elected monarch would have over

Throughout American history, after the establishment of the U.S. Constitution, the validity of executive privilege has been questioned in federal courts and among legal scholars on countless occasions. According to Merriam-Webster, executive privilege entails, “exemption from legally enforced disclosure of communications within the executive branch of government when such disclosure would adversely affect the functions and decision-making processes of the executive branch” (Merriam-Webster). In other words, executive privilege is the notion that the President is exempt from having to give evidence or disclose information to congressional hearings or to judicial inquiries. Executive privilege also typically includes immunity from legal disputes involving the presidency. Although not officially referred to as “executive privilege” until Eisenhower’s presidency, the first argument of executive privilege or immunity took place during George Washington’s presidency (The Constitution and Executive Privilege). Claiming executive privilege has been a common occurrence throughout all U.S. presidencies and continuing with President Obama. Those who argue against the legitimacy of executive privilege use the reasoning that it is not constitutional because it is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution and interrupts the separation of powers. On the other hand, many legal scholars assert that executive privilege is necessary for

The views of the presidency by the first sixteen presidents varied widely but all of their actions set precedents for their successors to use, expand, or even curtail the power of the office. Some believed in the Whig theory of strict adherence to the constitution, while others believed the president was the steward of the people with a loose interpretation of it. The power of the office expanded through the years, however it only expanded as far as the public and congress allowed.

The President’s formal powers, as found in Article II of the U.S. Constitution, begins with Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. This was the first power listed, signifying the prominence placed on keeping the country secure and safe, especially from foreign invasion. The next formal power of the President is the power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States. An example of said power would be, President Gerald Ford pardoning Richard Nixon following the Watergate scandal and the President ordering a reprieve or delay in the case of a person on death row until their case can be heard by a higher court. The President also has the power to make Treaties, with Senate approval, and to appoint Ambassadors and Supreme Court Judges, again, with Senate confirmation.

Presidential power has increased immensely over recent years and little is being done in an attempt to restore the original intent of the Constitution. There are multiple factors that affect this, including the executive orders of presidents, the Constitution giving an unequal distribution of power between the executive and legislative branch, the failure to use checks and balances, and the ineffectiveness of Congress. With the lack of congressional involvement in legislative decisions, the president has the ability to take matters in their own hands.

Each of these presidents has been gifted with executive power that is essentially upheld by the democracy form of government each country has. Democracy keeps the scope of their power explicitly limited. They have the power to sign or veto legislation efforts, command the armed forces, convene or adjourn Congress, and receive ambassadors. The strengths of the President of the United States is the military power they possess and him having direct access to commanding it.

An Analysis of Some Aspects of Presidential Powers regarding Immigrations and the Plenary Doctrine thereof

A miseducation by a great deal of the American people has resulted in a controversy stirring between two groups; concern for Obama’s abuse of executive orders and an opposing view that Obama’s conducting efficient use of presidential authority. The first party’s claim that Barack is taking part in unlawful and unconstitutional use of power, in need of being checked, is largely supported by the SLBA’s (Sierra Leone Bar Association) motivation to limit the use of executive orders and “supreme executive authority” in the proposal of revising the constitution. The conductor of the presentation for the SLBA’s position paper to the Constitutional Review Committee, Francis Ben Kaifala Esq, explained section 40 of the 1991 constitution as a prominent violation to the separation of