Taming the Most Dangerous Branch: The Scope and Accountability of Executive Power in the United States

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-138
Author(s):  
Earnest N. Bracey ◽  

Many revisionist historians today try to make the late President Andrew Jackson out to be something that he was not—that is, a man of all the people. In our uninhibited, polarized culture, the truth should mean something. Therefore, studying the character of someone like Andrew Jackson should be fully investigated, and researched, as this work attempts to do. Indeed, this article tells us that we should not accept lies and conspiracy theories as the truth. Such revisionist history comes into sharp focus in Bradley J. Birzer’s latest book, In Defense of Andrew Jackson. Indeed, his (selective) efforts are surprisingly wrong, as he tries to give alternative explanations for Jackson’s corrupt life and political malfeasance. Hence, the lawlessness of Andrew Jackson cannot be ignored or “white washed” from American history. More important, discrediting the objective truth about Andrew Jackson, and his blatant misuse of executive power as the U.S. President should never be dismissed, like his awful treatment of Blacks and other minorities in the United States. It should have been important to Birzer to get his story right about Andrew Jackson, with a more balanced approach in regards to the man. Finally, Jackson should have tried to eliminate Black slavery in his life time, not embrace it, based on the ideas of human dignity and our common humanity. To be brutally honest, it is one thing to disagree with Andrew Jackson; but it is quite another to feel that he, as President of the United States, was on the side of all the American people during his time, because it was not true. Perhaps the biggest question is: Could Andrew Jackson have made a positive difference for every American, even Black slaves and Native Americans?


Author(s):  
Margaret Colgate Love

Executive clemency has a rich history in the United States, both as an agent of justice and as a tool of politics. A presidential power to pardon was included in Article II of the Constitution, and all but one of the state constitutions provides for a clemency mechanism. States have established a variety of ways to manage and sometimes limit a governor’s exercise of the constitutional pardoning power, but the president’s power has remained unlimited by law. Until quite recently, clemency played a fully operational part in both federal and state justice systems, and the pardoning power was used regularly and generously to temper the harsh results of a criminal prosecution. Presidents also used their power to calm and unify the country after a period of strife, and to further policy goals when legislative solutions fell short. But in modern times unruly clemency’s justice-enhancing role has been severely diminished, initially because reforms in the legal system made it less necessary, but later because of theoretical and practical objections to its regular use. A reluctance on the part of elected officials to take political risks, as well as clemency-related controversies, have further eroded clemency’s legitimacy. As a result, in most U.S. jurisdictions clemency now plays a limited role, and the public regards its exercise with suspicion. There are only about a dozen states in which clemency operates as an integral part of the justice system, in large part because its exercise is protected from political pressures by constitutional design. At the same time, the need for an effective clemency mechanism has never been greater, particularly in the federal system, because of lengthy mandatory prison sentences and the lifelong collateral civil consequences of conviction. It appears unlikely that an unregulated and unrestrained executive power will ever be restored to its former justice-enhancing role, so that those concerned about fairness and proportionality in criminal punishments must engage in the more demanding work of democratic reform.


The article discusses the development of the procedure for empowering the governors of the states of the United States of America. The models of empowerment of governors, requirements for candidates for governor positions, the terms of the latter’s exercise of power both now and in retrospective are examined. The provisions of the constitutions of the states of the United States of America, fixing the requirements for candidates for the positions of governors of the states, are not always identical. Despite the existing differences established by the state constitutions regarding the requirements for candidates for governor positions and the terms for exercising the powers by governors, the procedure for electing state governors is the same. The increase in the term for exercising the powers by governors is due to an increase in the role and importance of governors as officials in charge of state executive power. Particular attention is paid to the study of requirements for candidates for governors. In addition to age qualifications and qualifications for citizenship, residency qualifications in the state where the candidate is running for governor are of prime importance. An in-depth study allows to track trends related to both the development of the procedure for vesting powers with governors and the change in the constitutional and legal status of governors as a whole. A key advantage of the constitutions of some states is the limitation of the duration of the state governors in their posts, thereby ensuring the effectiveness of the activities of the governors and executive power of the states.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer M. Miller

This article explores the central role of Japan’s rise to global economic prominence in the evolution of Donald J. Trump’s worldview. It traces how the transformation of the relationship between the United States and Japan during the 1980s informed Trump’s ideas about trade and protectionism, globalization, the international economy, and executive power. Trump, it argues, was a product of U.S.-Japanese relationship; while he began his public career as a prominent critic of Japan, claiming that the country exploited American trade and defense policy, his career in real estate heavily relied on Japanese finance. This contradictory approach continues to shape his understanding of Japan. As president, Trump repeatedly condemns Japan as predatory and protectionist, but also seeks expanded Japanese investment in the United States to revitalize the U.S. economy. Equally important, Trump has expanded criticisms originating with Japan to countries like China and Mexico, international agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the North American Free Trade Agreement, and the World Trade Organization. By tracing Trump’s rhetorical, financial, and diplomatic encounters with Japan over the past thirty years, this article uncovers the sources of Trump’s contradictory attitudes towards trade, globalization, and cross-border investment and his understandings of strong leadership and executive power.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. e59430
Author(s):  
Bruno Hendler ◽  
Felipe Porta

O presente artigo busca analisar quais foram os graus de mudança percebidos na política externa da Arábia Saudita nas suas relações com China e Estados Unidos. Para a realização desta análise, utilizamos os conceitos cunhados por Charles Hermann (1990), que explicam as alterações em política externa de um país a partir de quatro graus de mudança e quatro fontes geradoras destas mudanças. Não obstante, a utilização de livros, artigos, notícias e documentos oficiais dos governos foram essenciais para o desenvolvimento deste trabalho. Assim, argumentamos que há um gradual deslocamento dos Estados Unidos para a China como parceiro prioritário do referido país a partir de 2010, tendência esta acelerada pelos choques externos, como a Primavera Árabe, a queda nos preços internacionais do petróleo e o afastamento dos Estados Unidos do Oriente Médio, e pela ascensão de Mohammed bin Salman ao poder executivo do Reino. Tal deslocamento está associado ao aumento na intensidade e à alteração dos meios pelos quais o país se relaciona com a China. Entretanto, reforçamos que esta tendência não significa um abandono, pela Arábia Saudita, de sua histórica relação com os Estados Unidos.Palavras-chave: Arábia Saudita; Política Externa; Hermann.ABSTRACTThe aim of this research is to analyze the levels of changes identified in Saudi Arabia's foreign policy in its relations with China and the United States. To carry out this analysis, we used the concepts formulated by Charles Hermann (1990) about levels and sources of change in a country's foreign policy. Nevertheless, the use of books, articles, news and official government documents were essential for the development of this article. Hence, we argue that there is a gradual shift from the United States to China as a priority partner of Saudi Arabia since 2010, a trend that has been accelerated by external shocks from the International System, such as the Arab Spring, the fall of the international oil prices and the United States withdraw from the Middle East politics and by the rise of Mohammed bin Salman to the executive power. Such a shift is associated with an increase in intensity and a change in the means by which the country relates to China. Notwithstanding, this trend does not mean that Saudi Arabia abandoned its historic relationship with the United States. Keywords: Saudi Arabia; Foreign Policy; Hermann. Recebido em: 28 abr. 2021 | Aceito em: 30 set. 2021.


Author(s):  
R. V. Yengibaryan

Introduction. The personality of any US president due to his enormous constitutional authority and the place in the government structure of the country has always been considered extremely significant, even if in reality he did not quite measure up to the high moral and political criteria that both voters and the international community wanted him to meet.Materials and methods. Various scientific methods such as comparative-legal, systemic and a number of others form the methodological and research basis of the article.Results of the study. The US President, who is also the head of the Federal Government, the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and the US Navy is not only the first executive person of the country, but also the leader of one of the two leading political parties with enormous political and moral impact on the whole country, and the entire world community. During his term in office as President of the United States, all America and the whole world watch him on television, read and hear about him almost daily. To some extent he sets standards for men’s official fashion and behavior in society and in the family, he is a epitome of virtue and justice. How successful he is in this capacity is another question, but the fact is that the world community discusses his actions, words and behavior, wants to be like him or, on the contrary, criticizes him and does not agree with him, and this is an undeniable fact.Discussion and conclusion. With the date of the next presidential elections approaching and especially in the midst of the presidential campaign a large number of popular scientific and other publications are published in the United States and around the world on the institution of the US Presidency, its amazing stability and the ability to effectively lead the most dynamic branch of the three powers provided by the US Constitution the executive power.


Moreana ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 49 (Number 189- (3-4) ◽  
pp. 89-116
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Riley

This paper considers the legal proceedings in Thomas More’s trial on a charge of treason in contrast with certain specific protections and limitations as to power under the United States Constitution. King Henry VIII’s case against Thomas More demonstrates the risk to liberty when power is concentrated in one entity. A written constitution that limits government power and separates the exercise of judicial, legislative and executive power is the best protection against tyranny.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-112
Author(s):  
Nancy A. Wonders ◽  
Mona J. E. Danner

Regulatory rollbacks under the Trump administration are heightening social divides and deepening social inequalities. In this article, we examine key dynamics underlying this trend including the changing character of the nation-state, the growth of executive power, and the increased use of the “administrative presidency.” The administration’s choice to deregulate some areas, while increasing regulation in other spheres, reveals regulatory impulses as political, relational, and frequently contradictory tactics for exercising power. We explore a variety of ways that regulatory rollbacks under Trump are privileging wealthy corporations and elites, while rolling over the rights and social protections historically afforded many other groups. We also consider ways to bridge the deepening divides by creating coalitions, raising awareness, and revitalizing democracy in the United States.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document