President Donald Trump’s broad application of executive powers has ignited an intense constitutional discussion. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor adds to the increasing number of voices expressing concern over potential threats to the American checks and balances system.
“Our founders were determined to prevent the establishment of a monarchy, and their initial strategy was to assign Congress the power of the purse,” Sotomayor underscored on Tuesday, February 11, 2025, at Miami Dade College in Florida, in light of growing apprehensions about executive overreach.
The administration’s actions echo the concept first coined by former Trump advisor Steve Bannon as “the deconstruction of the administrative state,” which has transitioned from theoretical to practical. Central to this shift is an unprecedented collaboration between Trump and technology mogul Elon Musk, whose appointment to head a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) prompts critical questions about administrative oversight.
Constitutional expert Corey Brettschneider warns that “Musk’s actions pose a risk as he openly challenges the United States Constitution. According to the constitution, Congress holds the power of the purse, and the executive is responsible for spending the funds allocated by Congress.”
The administration’s invocation of emergency powers, mainly using the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to levy tariffs on key trading partners, represents a novel extension of the law’s reach. Despite the administration suspending new tariffs on Canada and Mexico for 30 days, the president’s decree was set to impose a 25% tariff on imports from these countries, a 10% tax on energy, and additional duties on Chinese goods already in effect.
The change within federal agencies has been rapid and extensive. Musk has openly declared the disassembling of USAID, while the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau operations have been halted. Under incoming Secretary Linda McMahon, the Department of Education faces potential reorganization or even abolition, and federal employees face a choice between accepting buyouts or possible termination.
The Justice Department has also undergone significant transformations. The FBI has provided the Trump administration with information on 5,000 employees who worked on cases relating to January 6, 2021. Trump stated his desire for “impartiality” to the new Attorney General Pamela Bondi in an Oval Office meeting. This statement has left little room for interpretation about his understanding of the term.
These actions align with the recommendations detailed in Project 2025, a blueprint for Republican governance that Trump had previously denied knowing about. The plan advocates for removing “enormous power” from career civil servants and administrative entities to reinstate power in the presidency.
Legal objections continue to pile up. A judge in Rhode Island recently ruled that the administration violated a court order concerning federal funding freezes. Vice President JD Vance publicly questioned judicial oversight when he posted on X, “If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal. Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”
Sotomayor responded to these remarks, stating, “Court decisions stand, whether one particular person chooses to abide by them or not. It doesn’t change the foundation that it’s still a court order that someone will respect at some point.”
House GOP Speaker Mike Johnson has defended the administration’s actions, expressing, “We see this as an active, engaged, committed executive branch authority doing what the executive branch should do. This is not a usurpation of authority in any way.”
Legal experts caution about rising tensions between the different branches of government. Attorney Mark Zaid told MSNBC, “Constitutional crisis may be a little bit over the top, but I think we’re on the verge of getting there. I’ve been telling many people we’re not even close to how bad it will be. It is going to get far, far worse.”
Sotomayor stressed the judiciary’s crucial role in upholding constitutional limits, stating the court must “make it clear to the society, the presidents, the Congress, the people that we are doing things based on law and the Constitution as we are interpreting it fairly.”
In conclusion, the justice issued a sober warning about historical precedent: “We’ve had moments where it’s been tested, but by and large, we have been a country who has understood that the rule of law has helped us maintain our democracy.”