Trump, Presidential Power, and Politico’s Short Memory

One of Politico’s latest pieces (“Trump’s sweeping claims of presidential power put courts in uncharted waters,” Sept. 24, 2025) reads like a breathless warning that Donald Trump is doing something never before seen in American history. According to the article, Trump’s second term has unleashed a wave of “unprecedented” legal battles—tariffs under emergency powers, firing independent agency heads, impounding foreign aid, sending in the National Guard, even deportations under the Alien Enemies Act.

But here’s the question Politico doesn’t want its readers to ask: is any of this really different from what past presidents have done? Or is the only difference that the name on the Oval Office desk is Donald J. Trump?

Executive Power Is Not New

From Lincoln suspending habeas corpus, to FDR seizing entire industries, to Obama rewriting immigration law by executive fiat, the story of the modern presidency is the story of power expanding at the margins. Every president in living memory has been accused of “overreach.” Courts have occasionally pushed back—see Truman’s failed steel mill seizure—but more often, the boundaries just move further out.

• FDR signed over 3,700 executive orders and interned Japanese Americans—upheld at the time by the Supreme Court.
• Truman tried to nationalize steel plants. The Court stopped him, but he still fought a war in Korea without a declaration.
• Reagan ran covert operations in Nicaragua that Congress hadn’t approved.
• George W. Bush built an entire detention system at Guantánamo Bay without congressional authorization.
• Obama stretched “prosecutorial discretion” into de facto amnesty (DACA/DAPA), despite Congress rejecting his immigration bills.

Somehow, none of these men were treated as constitutional wrecking balls on the front page of Politico.

What’s Different About Trump?

Trump’s difference is not that he’s asserting executive authority—it’s that he’s doing it more openly, faster, and without the apologetic lawyer-speak Washington usually prefers. Politico calls this “uncharted territory.” A better description would be: business as usual, but without the usual Beltway polish.

Yes, Trump has used the unitary executive theory to argue he can fire agency officials at will. But didn’t Obama fire GM’s CEO during the auto bailout? Didn’t Biden (with the blessing of the Court in Collins v. Yellen) confirm presidents’ broad firing authority over the FHFA? These fights are not new—they’re simply louder now because Trump makes no effort to hide the power struggle.

Selective Outrage

The press’s sudden concern about the Constitution’s “separation of powers” only seems to arise when Republicans are in office. Where were the dire warnings when Biden spent half a trillion dollars trying to cancel student loans by executive memo, after Congress explicitly declined to? When Obama unilaterally bombed Libya without congressional approval? When Clinton used executive orders to reshape entire sectors of the economy?

The truth is, Politico and its peers treat Trump’s actions as uniquely dangerous not because they are legally unprecedented, but because he is politically unapproved. The real standard at work is not “Is this constitutional?” but “Do we like the outcome?”

Courts Still Have the Last Word

It’s worth remembering: no president is the final word on his own power. Courts will decide whether Trump’s tariffs hold up, whether aid impoundments violate the Impoundment Control Act, whether his firings go beyond what Congress can limit. If the past is any guide, the judiciary will sometimes rein him in, sometimes uphold him, and future presidents of both parties will quietly pocket whatever precedents survive.

That’s the real story. Executive power in America only ratchets one way: forward. Trump may be pressing harder on the gas, but he’s driving the same road his predecessors paved.

Conclusion

Politico frames Trump’s presidency as if he’s inventing a new monarchy from scratch. History says otherwise. Every president since Lincoln has tested the outer edges of Article II. The only novelty is that Trump doesn’t dress it up in Ivy League euphemisms. That makes the establishment nervous. But nervous isn’t the same as unconstitutional.

If we’re serious about reining in executive power, we’d have to admit the problem didn’t start in January 2025—it started decades ago. And it won’t end with Donald Trump.