The United States Constitution establishes a system of government built upon the principles of separation of powers, checks and balances, and adherence to the rule of law. At the heart of this framework is the President of the United States, who is entrusted with the duty of executing the laws faithfully while preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution. This solemn obligation is enshrined in Article II, Section 1, Clause 8, which explicitly states:

​

"Before he enters on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—'I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.'"

​

The oath is more than mere words; it is a binding commitment to uphold the foundational principles of the United States. The President is sworn to act within the confines of the Constitution, ensuring that their actions do not exceed the authority granted to them. However, there has been an alarming trend of executive overreach, where the President has exercised powers beyond those constitutionally permitted. A significant manifestation of this overreach has been the increasing reliance on executive orders to enact policies that should, under the Constitution, be legislated by Congress.

​

The President of the United States has the authority to issue executive orders—directives that guide the operations of the federal government. While executive orders have been used throughout history, they were originally intended to facilitate the implementation of laws passed by Congress, not to create new laws independently. The problem arises when executive orders are used as a means to circumvent the legislative process, effectively allowing the President to assume legislative powers that are explicitly reserved for Congress.

​

Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states:

"All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

​

This clause clearly delineates the separation of powers by establishing that only Congress has the authority to make laws. The President’s role, as defined in Article II, is to enforce those laws, not to create them. When the President issues executive orders that function as laws without congressional approval, it undermines this fundamental principle and disrupts the balance of power.

​

Despite these clear constitutional boundaries, there have been numerous instances where the President has overstepped his authority by enacting policies that should have undergone the legislative process. By bypassing Congress, the President effectively silences the voices of the people’s elected representatives and weakens the democratic process. This erosion of constitutional boundaries sets a dangerous precedent, paving the way for an increasingly powerful executive branch that operates with little oversight.

​

The Constitution was designed with a system of checks and balances to prevent any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. This system ensures that the legislative, executive, and judicial branches operate independently while holding each other accountable. When the President issues executive orders that overstep constitutional limits, it not only infringes upon the powers of Congress but also disrupts this carefully constructed system.

​

Congress, as the legislative body, has the power to pass laws, amend existing legislation, and oversee the executive branch. When the President enacts policies through executive orders rather than going through the legislative process, it weakens Congress’s authority and diminishes the role of the people’s representatives. This results in an imbalance where the executive branch becomes the dominant force in government, rather than one equal part of a three-branch system.

​

A President who acts outside of their constitutional jurisdiction does not only infringe upon the authority of Congress and the judiciary but also endangers the rights of the American people. The Constitution was designed to protect individual liberties from government overreach, ensuring that no single branch wields unchecked power. When executive orders are used as a tool for enacting policies without congressional approval, citizens are left vulnerable to policies that may infringe upon their freedoms.

​

For instance, consider the implications of executive orders that impact freedom of speech, privacy rights, and due process. The First Amendment guarantees the right to free speech, but if a President issues orders that suppress political dissent, regulate media coverage, or limit public demonstrations, it undermines this fundamental right. Similarly, the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, yet executive policies that expand government surveillance without congressional oversight can threaten the privacy of American citizens.

​

The role of the Constitution is to safeguard the rights of individuals against government abuse. When the President acts beyond their authority, these rights are put at risk. Citizens must recognize that an unchecked executive branch does not serve their interests but rather consolidates power in a way that is fundamentally undemocratic. The people must hold their leaders accountable and demand adherence to constitutional principles.

​

As of 2025, the President of the United States has issued a series of executive orders that demonstrate an alarming pattern of overreach. These orders not only exceed the constitutional authority granted to the executive branch but also directly infringe upon the powers of Congress and violate the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. Among the most egregious actions taken by the administration are the unilateral firing of federal employees, the dismantling of the Department of Education—an agency whose existence falls within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch—and the halting of federal grants that had already been approved by Congress. These actions constitute a clear breach of the system of checks and balances established by the Constitution, raising serious concerns about the erosion of democratic governance and the increasing concentration of power within the executive branch.

​

One of the fundamental principles of American democracy is the separation of powers, which ensures that no single branch of government wields unchecked authority. The President’s decision to unilaterally fire federal employees represents a blatant overstep of executive power. While the executive branch has the authority to oversee federal agencies, the wholesale dismissal of government employees without due process or legislative oversight undermines the integrity of the civil service system. Federal employees are protected under various statutes that require adherence to established procedures, and their removal should be subject to congressional regulations, not the arbitrary decision of a single individual.

​

The power to oversee and regulate federal employment policies largely rests with Congress, which enacts laws governing the hiring and dismissal of government workers. The President’s mass firing of federal employees without congressional approval disregards these laws and disrupts the established balance of power. Such actions set a dangerous precedent, allowing the executive branch to exert undue influence over government operations and weakening the stability of federal institutions.

​

The President’s executive order to dismantle the Department of Education is another example of unconstitutional overreach. The Department of Education was established by Congress in 1979 through the Department of Education Organization Act. As such, any decision to dissolve or significantly restructure the agency must go through the legislative process, not through an executive order.

​

Congress alone possesses the authority to determine the structure and function of federal agencies. By bypassing the legislative branch, the President is encroaching upon congressional authority and violating the principles of separation of powers. The dissolution of the Department of Education without congressional approval disregards the Constitution’s mandate that all legislative powers reside with Congress, further illustrating the administration’s disregard for constitutional limitations.

Another troubling act of executive overreach is the President’s decision to place a hold on federal grants that have already been approved by Congress.

The Constitution grants Congress the power of the purse, meaning that only the legislative branch has the authority to appropriate federal funds. Once Congress has allocated funds and approved grants, the executive branch is constitutionally obligated to implement those decisions, not unilaterally override them.

​

By halting federal grants without legislative approval, the President is usurping the spending power that belongs exclusively to Congress. This action is a direct violation of the Appropriations Clause in Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the Constitution, which states: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." The executive branch does not have the authority to withhold or redirect funds at will; doing so constitutes a breach of constitutional governance and undermines the financial stability of programs and institutions that rely on federal funding.

​

Perhaps the most flagrant example of executive overreach is the President’s executive order attempting to eliminate birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents. This order directly contradicts the Fourteenth Amendment, which unequivocally grants citizenship to all individuals born on U.S. soil, regardless of the immigration status of their parents.

​

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment states:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

​

The language of the amendment is clear and leaves no room for reinterpretation. The Supreme Court reaffirmed this principle in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898), where it ruled that the term "all persons" in the Fourteenth Amendment applies to every individual born in the United States, regardless of the citizenship status of their parents. By issuing an executive order that contradicts both the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent, the President is engaging in an outright assault on constitutional law.

​

Executive orders do not have the power to override constitutional amendments. The only legal means of altering birthright citizenship would be through a constitutional amendment, which requires a rigorous process involving both Congress and the states. The President’s attempt to unilaterally change the constitutional definition of citizenship is not only unconstitutional but also a direct challenge to the rule of law.

​

The executive orders issued by the President represent a troubling departure from constitutional governance. By overstepping the bounds of executive authority, the administration is effectively dismantling the principles of checks and balances that serve as the foundation of American democracy. The concentration of power in the executive branch threatens to erode individual rights, weaken congressional authority, and undermine the legitimacy of the Constitution itself.

​

Unchecked executive power is a hallmark of authoritarian rule, not democratic governance. If the President is allowed to continue issuing unconstitutional executive orders without consequence, it sets a dangerous precedent for future administrations. The role of the executive branch is to enforce laws, not to create them. When the President assumes legislative powers, the entire structure of government becomes unbalanced, jeopardizing the freedoms and protections guaranteed to American citizens.

​

The responsibility to uphold the Constitution does not rest solely with elected officials—it belongs to all citizens. The American people must demand accountability from their leaders and challenge any attempts to subvert constitutional principles. Congress must exercise its oversight authority to check executive overreach, and the judiciary must continue to strike down unconstitutional orders.

​

Furthermore, citizens must remain informed and actively participate in the democratic process. Awareness of constitutional rights and vigilance against government overreach are essential to preserving democracy. The United States was founded on the principles of limited government and the rule of law—principles that must be defended against any attempt to erode them.

​

The President’s recent executive orders exemplify a dangerous pattern of overreach that undermines the Constitution, disregards congressional authority, and threatens the democratic foundation of the nation. From unlawfully firing federal employees and dismantling government agencies to halting approved funding and attempting to strip birthright citizenship, these actions violate fundamental constitutional principles. The Constitution is not a document to be ignored or circumvented—it is the supreme law of the land. If these unconstitutional measures are allowed to stand, the future of American democracy is at risk. It is the duty of every citizen, legislator, and judicial body to defend the Constitution and ensure that executive power remains within its rightful limits.