My column today in the Post-Gazette.

Bruce ledewitz: Donald Trump’s an autocrat, but he succeeded an autocrat

Special to the Post-Gazette

Jan 27, 2025

5:30 AM

Observers on the left are worried that under President Donald Trump, America will “sleepwalk” into autocracy. I have news: we already live in a Presidential autocracy. We just exchange one elected presidential dictator for another.

In the waning days of his administration, President Joe Biden rejected the proposed merger of U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel. But why was this decision up to him? The government rejects mergers that violate anti-trust laws, but the government must prove that the merger violates a statute. Biden claimed national security grounds, but everyone knew his reasons were political.

At the end, Biden issued executive orders like candy from a parade float. He limited offshore drilling for fossil fuels, accelerated the build-out of data centers for artificial intelligence, promoted cybersecurity against hackers and increased federal government sanction authority.

Maybe good ideas. But what happened to Congress?

Presidential lawmaking

Trump perfectly illustrates this pattern of presidential lawmaking. On his first day in office, he issued an executive order delaying enforcement of a law requiring the sale of TikTok after the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld the statute.

A president blocking a law? The president’s job is to execute the laws, not suspend them.

Of course, presidents have not enforced federal laws criminalizing marijuana for years.

Trump also said after his election that he was considering taking over the Panama Canal. We have a treaty with Panama that binds the United States. Presidents cannot rescind treaties, either.

And because Trump hates wind power, no permits for wind.

It is an affront to the Constitution that the change in administrations from Biden to Trump changes so much U.S. policy. Under the Constitution, Congress makes domestic policy, not the president.

Take two core Trump policy proposals — deportations and tariffs. On immigration, it was President Barack Obama who, after trying to get Congress to change immigration law, began making immigration policy on his own. Presidents have been essentially writing the laws in this critical area ever since.

On tariffs, Trump pledged during the campaign to impose tariffs on all foreign goods. But the last time America did that was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, which was a statute, not an executive order.

Aside from whether tariffs are a good idea, the Constitution gives Congress, not the president, authority to regulate foreign commerce.

Loose laws

I am not suggesting that these actions and proposals are currently illegal. The situation is worse than that. Apparently our laws are written and interpreted so loosely that presidents have vast areas of discretion.

This accretion of executive power is how Rome deteriorated from a Republic to an Empire. The Emperor began to act on his own without waiting for the Roman Senate.

Since the beginning of the Cold War, legal theorists have been complaining about the growth of power in the presidency. But it was the quick succession of presidents with differing ideologies — from Obama to Trump to Biden and back to Trump again — that has brought home just how much influence the president has over America’s domestic life.

Can we stop this slide into presidential elected dictatorship in which one figure essentially makes the law?

Yes, we can stop this any time we choose. All that is required is that Congress do its job of legislating. Currently, Congress is hamstrung by the abuse of the filibuster by both major parties.

Excessive filibusters in the Senate have prevented enactment of immigration reform and trade policy by requiring 60 votes in the Senate to pass important legislation instead of the constitutionally mandated 51 votes.

But the filibuster could be eliminated tomorrow by a simple Senate majority. If that were done, the narrow Republican majorities in Congress could be joined by some moderate Democrats to form a working congressional majority to really tackle the nation’s problems.

We might even be able to reform Social Security to render it solvent and rein in the national debt.

The invigoration of the legislative process would transfer power away from the White House and back to Congress, where the people have a much greater say. That is the road back to a healthy constitutional democracy.

Two gracious actions

But, having criticized the actions of both Biden and Trump at the end of the Biden Administration, I must also note how both men cooperated in the best interests of the United States during this period.

It was widely reported that before his inauguration, Trump successfully pressured Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to accept the long-standing Biden Administration framework for a cease-fire in Gaza.

Of course, Trump took credit for his actions. Nevertheless, so did Biden, as Trump knew he would. It would have been better politically for Trump to hold off until he became President. Trump put the interests of the nation before his own.

In Biden’s case, the gracious action was attending Trump’s inauguration after Trump refused to attend his, in 2021. By not following Trump’s example, Biden revived the crucial American tradition of the peaceful and bipartisan transfer of power. There is no greater service he could have rendered his country.

Bruce Ledewitz is a professor of law at the Thomas R. Kline School of Law of Duquesne University. His previous column was “The Supreme Court’s majority is beginning to think more clearly.” The views expressed do not represent those of Duquesne University.

First Published: January 27, 2025, 5:30 a.m