Sooner than we may think, the Supreme Court will have to decide whether it will continue to expand presidential powers beyond anything imagined in the Constitution, or if it will uphold the separation of powers it purportedly reveres. One aspect of Donald Trump’s push to stock the federal workforce with loyalists is already before the Court; more broadly, his massive, attempted funding freeze deliberately set the stage for a Supreme Court showdown that could make him — and by proxy Elon Musk — a de facto dictator over the entirety of the federal government without the checks and balances clearly embedded in our Constitution.
In his first three weeks in office, Trump attempted to unconstitutionally seize the power of the purse away from Congress by ordering a sudden freeze on federal grants, loans, and other congressionally approved funding. This process, called impoundment, violates appropriations law, authorizations law, the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) and the Constitution. The nearly $3 trillion in frozen funds powered everything from veterans’ benefits and infrastructure projects to local health care programs, charities serving children and the elderly, and life-saving foreign aid. Even Meals on Wheels was impacted. The freeze struck fear into the hearts of millions of Americans who didn’t know where they would get their next paycheck or meal.
The above excerpt was originally published in Talking Points Memo.
Click here to view the full article.