By Douglas V. Gibbs
Our government operates under a constitutional concept not seen anywhere else in the world: A Separation of Powers. The United States Constitution established three branches of government through Articles I, II, and III. Each branch is “vested” with its own powers, a word that signals the principle of separation of powers. This design ensures that the legislative, executive, and judicial branches operate independently, except where the Constitution explicitly authorizes overlap.
A few examples of this limited overlap include:
• Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 (Exceptions Clause): Congress may influence the judiciary’s docket and negate rulings or judicial opinion it deems unconstitutional.
• Impeachment and confirmation powers: Congress can impeach judges and executive officials, and are tasked with approving presidential nominations.
• Article II, Section 3: The President may convene or adjourn Congress on extraordinary occasions.
• Article I, Section 8 and Article III, Section 1: Congress controls the creation, modification, and abolition of inferior courts, as well as the size of the Supreme Court.
• Article I, Section 3, Clause 4: The Vice President, though part of the executive branch, presides over the Senate and casts tie-breaking votes as President of the Senate.
Beyond these exceptions (and perhaps a couple others), the branches are designed to remain separate. Similarly, the federal government and the states operate independently, except where the Constitution provides otherwise.
While independence exists, it is not absolute. At the state level, for example, States oversee counties and cities, and state constitutions guide local governance.
Within the federal government, independence is between the branches, not within them.
• Legislative staff answers only to Congress.
• The Supreme Court supervises the lower courts.
• The President, vested with executive power, is the head of the executive branch.
Which brings us to the fallacy of agency independence. There is no constitutional clause granting executive departments or agencies pure independence. The President is their boss. Claims that a president is “authoritarian” for exercising control over agencies are therefore misguided.
Yes, Congress creates agencies, but once established, they become part of the executive branch. Their purpose is to assist the President in executing the laws. While agencies may have structural differences and practical independence based on their missions, they remain under presidential authority.
The idea of the existence of division between “executive agencies” and “independent agencies” is a false dichotomy. The Constitution does not recognize such a distinction. Agencies may communicate directly with Congress for efficiency, but this does not diminish the President’s ultimate authority.
No president can fully control the vast bureaucracy, simply because it is not humanly possible. Priorities and styles differ: some presidents take a hands-off approach, while others, like President Trump, have sought to rein in agency independence to combat corruption, waste, and unconstitutional practices.
Critics argue this is interference, but in reality, it is the President fulfilling his constitutional duty. Agencies are tools for executing the law, and the President may direct them as long as actions remain constitutional and lawful.
The “independent agency” label misleads the public. Agencies are not separate branches of government; they are part of the executive branch. Laws that attempt to insulate agencies from presidential oversight conflict with the Constitution. Congress cannot legislate away the President’s authority over his own branch.
The growth of the administrative state, which we know also as “The Swamp” or “Deep State,” has created panic whenever a president asserts control. Beneficiaries of this bloated system resist reform, but their opposition lacks constitutional grounding.
The Constitution does not empower Congress or the judiciary to micromanage the President’s execution of the law. If Congress disagrees with presidential actions, its remedies are limited to defunding agencies or agency operations or initiating impeachment. Ultimately, the people decide through elections whether a president’s approach should continue.
The executive branch belongs to the President of the United States. Agencies, regardless of their design, are not independent in the constitutional sense. They exist to serve the President in his duty to faithfully execute the laws. Any argument to the contrary is a false one, unsupported by the Constitution.
— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
