Are Members of Congress Pushing Back against President Trump? Part II
Some (Small) Signs of GOP Resistance
In an earlier post I documented several ways that congressional Democrats have been trying to resist Donald Trump’s dictatorial White House, despite being in the deep minority.
The GOP, by contrast, has majorities in the legislative branch and thus the formal authority to check the executive branch. So what have Republicans in Congress been doing in response to Trump?
Well, certainly not much checking. To the contrary, they have been exceedingly supine, even in the face of unprecedented efforts by the president to exert unilateral authority over their own branch of government, the judiciary, U.S. states, and domestic civil society, not to mention acting in ways that exceed the worst abuses of any of his predecessors.
For instance, when Trump has done things that are controversial, if not illegal or unconstitutional, most of his fellow partisans in Congress have followed the time-honored tactic of either saying nothing or claiming ignorance.
Some Republicans have gone further, defending the president or declaring that they are powerless to stop him.1 Representative Tom Cole (R-OK), chair of the House Appropriations Committee, made the shocking (and patently false) claim in January that Trump could refuse to spend monies appropriated by Congress (known as “impoundment”) because “appropriations is not a law.”
Not longer afterwards, Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) admitted her doubts about confirming the pro-impoundment “radical constitutionalist” Russ Vought to be head of the powerful Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Rather than use her constitutional power to vote against him, she voted in favor of his nomination, but with the “hope” that the courts would stop him from undermining Congress’ spending power.2
Even worse, Republicans have actually sought to weaken existing checks against presidential overreach. The GOP majority in the House has already passed measures that limit the power of judges to issue nationwide injunctions and hold officials in contempt of court,3 make it harder to get information about executive branch wrongdoing, and block expedited objections to Trump’s tariffs.
Political self-interest drives much of this behavior. A central principle behind the design of our political institutions is that, in the words of James Madison, “the interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place.” But for a number of reasons, the interests of Republican lawmakers have become divorced from Congress’s constitutional powers, and instead have become more closely aligned with the demands of the executive branch.
For example, Trump is still very popular among GOP voters, who seemingly want Congress to follow him without question. Disobeying Trump also risks retaliation, including threats of violence by his most fervent supporters, and may result in defeat in the next primary election. In addition, Republican legislators share many of the president’s policy goals, and by staying in his good graces, GOP leaders hope he can help them whip votes in a narrowly divided Congress.
Examples of GOP Resistance
Nonetheless, there are some tentative signs that not all Republicans in Congress will always let the White House have its way.
The Senate, for example, has occasionally used its power to block Trump’s nominations to executive branch positions. When the president demanded that the Senate go into recess so he could appoint acting officials without its consent, the Republican-led chamber brushed the idea aside, and Trump has since had to withdraw multiple nominees due to bipartisan Senate opposition.4
Meanwhile, Senator Collins, belatedly realizing that the legislative branch has to stand up for itself, cosigned a letter warning Russ Vought that the president cannot refuse to spend appropriated funds. Congressman Cole has also gotten frustrated with Vought, noting that “no president…get(s) to dictate what’s going to happen here.” Collins, Cole, and their senior Democratic colleagues on the House and Senate appropriations committees also pushed back when the OMB director ignored the law by concealing public data on how federal dollars are being spent.
It is especially noteworthy that, after months of trying to freeze federal spending and eliminate agencies by itself, the White House – whether because of the aforementioned complaints from lawmakers, pleas from budget hawks on the Hill, or the roadblocks imposed by judges – has asked Congress to eliminating spending through the legal “rescissions” process. I regard this as a grudging acknowledgment that the legislative branch, not the executive branch, holds the nation’s purse strings.
A handful of congressional Republicans have also been unafraid to challenge Trump’s early policy moves. Legislation to take away the executive branch’s power to set tariffs was introduced by Republicans in both chambers, and the Senate came within one vote of passing a bill to undo Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs. More recently, three Florida Republicans expressed alarm at a plan to make Venezuelan immigrants subject to deportation.
Agency restructuring by Trump and DOGE has also faced GOP opposition, such as the threatened elimination of executive branch entities like FEMA. DOGE’s ham-handed effort to embed its staff in several legislative branch entities was swiftly blocked, while a legally dubious attempt by Trump to install his own pick as head of the Library of Congress was sharply criticized by leaders of both parties and, as of this writing, has yet to be implemented.
Consider What We Don’t See
Also keep in mind that these are instances that we know about. It’s quite possible that congressional Republicans have also been trying to constrain Trump privately, perhaps with some success.
I found it revealing what House Speaker Mike Johnson said to a reporter what asked he would do if he believed that the president’s tariff-making violated the powers of Congress. “I think the first protocol,” he said, “to be very frank, is I would call the president and talk with him.”
Inaction can be a form of resistance as well. Jonathan Bernstein reminds us that “congressional Republicans defy or just plain ignore Trump all the time.” As Trump increasingly looks to Congress to achieve his objectives (which I expect will be the case) he will likely same dynamic during his first term that was identified by Matt Glassman in 2019: same-party lawmakers will do nothing to implement elements of the president’s agenda they dislike and let him take credit for things they were going to do anyway.
To be sure, these instances are far from what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they created Congress to be a powerful, independent branch of government. And many of these acts of resistance are so minor or undetectable that they effectively allow the president to maintain a veneer of institutional supremacy and, by extension, the impression that Congress is a uselessly weak legislature.
But given the many incentives for the GOP to give the president everything he wants, it’s worth noting that – after just six months of his second term – Trump’s grip on his party in Congress, and its commitment to his vision of an unfettered dictatorial presidency, may not be quite as strong as he thinks it is.
In a future post I will elaborate on why some Republicans have stood up against the Trump White House and speculate whether we may see more intra-party resistance in the future.
Another approach that Republicans take is abject flattery, as the New Yorker recently documented.
Perhaps the most impressive example was offered by House Speaker Mike Johnson. When he was asked by a reporter about Qatar’s questionable gift of a plane to the president, managed to combine ignorance, a defense of Trump, and a surrender of congressional authority in a single statement.
Gabe Fleischer offers a helpful explanation of nationwide injunctions, and also notes that the legislative language blocking contempt of court orders might not do much in practice. Plus, neither legislative provision may survive the Senate.
These include Matt Gaetz (Attorney General), Ed Martin (U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia), and Dave Weldon (Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). Conservative activists helped torpedo other nominations, such as Chad Chronister (DEA) and Janette Nesheiwat (Surgeon General).