As recently as Tuesday, a federal judge blocked the Trump administration from enforcing an executive order targeting the law firm Susman Godfrey, describing it as an unconstitutional “personal vendetta.” “Frankly, I think the Framers of our Constitution would see this as a shocking abuse of power,” U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan said.

 

Trump has signed 124 orders in less than 100 days. Scholars warn this is a constitutional crisis

1 minute ago, simple1 said:

As recently as Tuesday, a federal judge blocked the Trump administration from enforcing an executive order targeting the law firm Susman Godfrey, describing it as an unconstitutional “personal vendetta.” “Frankly, I think the Framers of our Constitution would see this as a shocking abuse of power,” U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan said.

 

Trump has signed 124 orders in less than 100 days. Scholars warn this is a constitutional crisis

Lefties upset again

I think that's called, keeping your campaign promises and getting things done ASAP.

"We are confident in the lawfulness of the Administration's actions and in ultimately prevailing against an onslaught of meritless litigation brought by radical activists who care more about the rights of terrorist aliens than those of the American people," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-temporarily-blocks-deportations-venezuelan-migrants-under-2025-04-19/

 

______________________

 

So I rest easy that everything behind the Executive orders is A-OK because Ms. Karoline has said so.

The full headline that got curtailed in the OP post in fact read -- "Constitutional Crisis"

 

From the OP news report:

Trump has signed 124 orders in less than 100 days. Scholars warn this is a constitutional crisis

 

23 April 2025

 

"As Donald Trump nears the end of his first 100 days in office, he has issued a record-breaking high of 124 executive orders, while signing a record-breaking low of just five new bills into law, and caused concerns among constitutional scholars. [emphasis added]

 

“These orders are extraordinary, not just in their number, but in their breadth,” said Rory Little, a law professor at the University of California- San Francisco said at a recent panel discussion. “The current state of affairs can be characterized I think with no exaggeration as a crisis, a challenge to the rule of the law in the United States.” [emphasis added]

...

“While some may legitimately applaud the policy goals that underlie some of these actions, I hope we can all agree these policy goals should be pursued lawfully, lest we end up living in the type of system envisioned by the president, where he is the only law,” fellow professor Jodi Short said. [emphasis added]

 

(more)

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-executive-orders-constitution-law-b2738186.html

 

That's what a dictator is and does... attempts to rule unilaterally without feeling the need for governing via laws promulgated and enacted by the elected legislators, in the case of the U.S., those being Congress.

 

 

On 4/24/2025 at 8:44 AM, KhunLA said:

I think that's called, keeping your campaign promises and getting things done ASAP.

Ahh nooo that’s dictating not legislating…..

02APR2025  -- President Trump is invoking his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) to address the national emergency posed by the large and persistent trade deficit that is driven by the absence of reciprocity in our trade relationships and other harmful policies like currency manipulation and exorbitant value-added taxes (VAT) perpetuated by other countries.

Using his IEEPA authority, President Trump will impose a 10% tariff on all countries.

 

This will take effect April 5, 2025 at 12:01 a.m. EDT.

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/04/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-declares-national-emergency-to-increase-our-competitive-edge-protect-our-sovereignty-and-strengthen-our-national-and-economic-security/

_______________________________

 

As multiple lawsuits now state, including two from a conservative legal firm, the IEEPA does not contain the word "tariff".

 

 

To me, trump's reliance on Executive Orders vs. legislation seems like a lazy way to "govern".

 

Too bad he can't issue Executive Orders to "lower prices on day 1", "force tariffs on trading partners," or end the war in Ukraine.

 

But, I think his staff know that he loves to sign his name, and these orders make him feel "powerful". But, if anything, these make him seem weak as a leader.

 

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-orders/

 

 

 

As Ms. Leavitt said JAN 28 *:

"He is the executive of the executive branch, and therefore he has the power to fire anyone within the executive branch that he wishes to," she said.

So now, as per executive orders, he is just the executive of the executive branch acting (incredibly) executively on anything regarding executive orders that he executively wishes.

* https://www.axios.com/2025/01/28/white-house-ig-firings

The conservative-funded Pacific Legal Foundation handling 2 of the executive order IEEPA tariff cases says this:

The president claims his tariff authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Passed by Congress in 1977, IEEPA provides that, upon the declaration of a national emergency, the president may exercise certain authorities “to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat” to national security, foreign policy, or the economy. Historically, IEEPA has been used to impose economic sanctions in furtherance of foreign policy and national security goals—not to impose tariffs. But the statute includes no standards or guidelines for the exercise of those authorities. And IEEPA makes no mention of tariffs.
(AND)

We've been fighting for freedom since 1973. Over our 50 years, we've brought 20 cases to the Supreme Court and won 18 victories, including landmark cases in property rights and administrative law.

https://pacificlegal.org/case/tariffs-lawsuit/

5 hours ago, Tug said:

Ahh nooo that’s dictating not legislating…..

From wiki ... he has a lot of catching up to do: 

 

Never let the facts of him not being a dictator get in the way of a good spin ...

 

44 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

From wiki ... he has a lot of catching up to do: 

 

Never let the facts of him not being a dictator get in the way of a good spin ...

 

Soo FDR during  the Great Depression ww2 and 3 terms …..then our Donald in the first 100 days 141 no legislation ignoring court orders throwing the worlds markets into chaos threatening our closest neighbors practically teabagging our enemy as he try’s to undermine nato…..ya got it…..

The sheer number of Trump Executive Orders, intended as kind of shock & awe, may soon work against the admin as they have let go or fired so many career-attorneys as per this NY Times headline 7 APR 2025:

- Justice Dept. Lawyers Are Struggling to Defend Trump’s Policies in Court
- Inside the department’s civil division, litigators are squeezed between judges demanding answers and bosses’ instructions to protect the Trump agenda at all costs.

Photo caption: Career lawyers say they increasingly feel trapped between President Trump’s political appointees, like Attorney General Pam Bondi, and judges who demand comprehensible answers to basic questions.

On 4/24/2025 at 8:44 AM, KhunLA said:

I think that's called, keeping your campaign promises and getting things done ASAP.

So, apparently, this doesn't apply to you:

"While some may legitimately applaud the policy goals that underlie some of these actions, I hope we can all agree these policy goals should be pursued lawfully, lest we end up living in the type of system envisioned by the president, where he is the only law,” fellow professor Jodi Short said. [emphasis added]"

3 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

As Ms. Leavitt said JAN 28 *:

"He is the executive of the executive branch, and therefore he has the power to fire anyone within the executive branch that he wishes to," she said.

So now, as per executive orders, he is just the executive of the executive branch acting (incredibly) executively on anything regarding executive orders that he executively wishes.

* https://www.axios.com/2025/01/28/white-house-ig-firings

Are there any courts deciding on the issue of whether or not the President's executive authority is absolute? As you may recall, Congress voted to grant Bill Clinton the right to exercise a line item veto. The Supreme Court ruled that was unconstitutional. On the grounds that the line item veto is nowhere specified in the Constitutiion and violates the separation of powers. Congress can't sign away its Constitutional rights and duties. So if that's illegal, can the President exercise de facto line item veto power by making it impossible to execute those laws via layoffs and/or funding rescissions?

The only cases that I am following involve specifically the invoking of the IEEPA as a justification for the proposed tax regime.

16 president, 1/3 of all, issued more than Trump.

They are good .... Trump is bad

 

Clinton, Obama, Biden all campaign, state border needs more control, too many illegally coming across.   DO NOTHING

 

Trump states need to close border, too many coming across illegally.  Closes the border.

 

Clinton, Obama, Biden ... good

Trump ... bad

 

Got it

2 hours ago, KhunLA said:

From wiki ... he has a lot of catching up to do: 

 

Never let the facts of him not being a dictator get in the way of a good spin ...

 

You are NOT comparing like with like.  Trump 2nd term figures are obviously only for his first 100 days all the other figures are TOTALS.

Even them Trump in his first 100 days has issued nearly half as many as he did in his whole first term.

4 minutes ago, rough diamond said:

You are NOT comparing like with like.  Trump 2nd term figures are obviously only for his first 100 days all the other figures are TOTALS.

Even them Trump in his first 100 days has issued nearly half as many as he did in his whole first term.

If he accomplishes what he wants, ASAP, he really won't need to execute too many more.  Reps do control Congress.   He just doesn't won't to deal with the procrastination of Congress.  As they want him to fail, both Reps & Dems.   They are scum and only have self interests in anything they do. 

 

They are executive orders, not laws, and have expiration dates, so silly to think the USA or world will be changing because of any order he executes.  Along with the need to pass judicial review if challenged.

 

The deranged folks can give it rest .... it's called 'checks & balance' and has worked for over 230 years.

Just now, KhunLA said:

They are executive orders, not laws, and have expiration dates, so silly to think the USA or world will be changing because of any order he executes.

Are you saying the tariff orders have not changed the financial markets around the world or the election in Canada etc etc.?

 

If the Executive orders are NOT important why did you post the table?

'Programs. Programs Here! Can't Tell The Players Without A Program.' 

 

Tracking the lawsuits against Donald Trump’s executive actions

Last updated Apr 29, 2025, 4:10 AM

 

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed during President Donald Trump’s second administration. The suits challenge his executive orders as well as actions taken by his administration, including Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE. The courts have agreed to block the president in a number of cases, and the administration is seeking appeals as well.

 

https://apnews.com/projects/trump-executive-order-lawsuit-tracker/

 

8 minutes ago, rough diamond said:

Are you saying the tariff orders have not changed the financial markets around the world or the election in Canada etc etc.?

 

If the Executive orders are NOT important why did you post the table?

He hasn't even issued any tariffs yet, I don't think, not that I care, but aren't they on hold for 90 days, till done negotiating.   Aside from most are simply reciprocal, but that doesn't seem to sink in with the derangement folks.

 

Posted the list of presidents & # of orders (thought self explanatory), shows he issues less than 1/3 of all the previous presidents that issued more.  But when he does it, he's bad, and they are OK.

 

The deranged folks need to actually understand what he is doing, which they apparently don't.   So they may want to concentrate on getting a life, instead of consistently embarrassing  themselves repeatedly with their paranoia, based on an unbelievable amount of ignorance... IMHO

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

16 president, 1/3 of all, issued more than Trump.

They are good .... Trump is bad

As I said above you are not comparing like with like.  100 days v Terms!

 

Just now, rough diamond said:

As I said above you are not comparing like with like.  100 days v Terms!

 

Then as I stated, 16 issued more than his 1st administration.   Why not wait till he is done issuing orders, so you have a total number to compare to.

 

Along with, you don't know how many orders of the previous president were issued in the first 100 days or their administration.

 

Y'all have a good day, as you'll keep going around in circles, and my dog is staring at me.  Apparently time for my walk.

 

BYE BYE

9 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Then as I stated, 16 issued more than his 1st administration.   Why not wait till he is done issuing orders, so you have a total number to compare to.

Then why post totally irrelevant and misleading data in the first place.

This is getting to be like the Emperor's New Clothes where everyone who doesn't understand or realize what Trump is doing is deranged.

32 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

He hasn't even issued any tariffs yet,

B.S.

Though Trump announced a pause for many the tariffs he introduced on April 9, the White House confirmed with USA TODAY that many still remain in effect, including:

20% tariffs previously imposed on China, now totaling 145% with latest announcements.

A baseline tariff of 10% that took effect April 5 for trading partners targeted in Trump's announcement April 2. Canada, Mexico, Russia, North Korea and others do not have a baseline tariff.

Section 232 tariffs on steel, aluminum and autos remain unchanged.

Sectoral carve-outs in the reciprocal/baseline tariffs as outlined in the initial executive order remain unchanged.

The EU tariff remains at the 10% baseline that took effect April 5. An additional 20% tariff on EU is paused.

Fentanyl tariffs on Canada and Mexico remain unchanged – USMCA trade is tariff-free, non-USMCA trade is tariffed at 25% (except for energy and potash, which is tariffed at 10%).

The baseline 10% did not take effect on Canada and Mexico on April 5, and neither country is getting the 10% baseline now.

A tariff on countries importing Venezuelan oil remains in effect.

See what tariffs are currently in place, who's impacted by trade war

On 4/24/2025 at 11:27 AM, Harrisfan said:

Lefties upset again

 

No. People concerned with the drift to autocracy and attacks on Rule of Law.. Surely whether one is generally to the right or left of politics it is a major concern with the attempted trend setting by Trump administration

1 minute ago, simple1 said:

 

No. People concerned with the drift to autocracy and attacks on Rule of Law.. Surely whether one is generally to the right or left of politics it is a major concern with the attempted trend setting by Trump administration

5 days ago 

20 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

5 days ago 

 

And?