President Trump’s aggressive restructuring of the federal government’s executive branch has ignited a fierce constitutional battle centered around the limits of presidential power. Citing the “unitary executive theory,” Trump has taken unprecedented steps to assert control over federal agencies, including mass firings of Democratic appointees, disbanding diversity initiatives, and challenging independent regulatory bodies. Is Trump the only president in U.S. history to face such resistance?
Trump’s Constitutional Power Grab
President Donald Trump has launched an unprecedented effort to reshape the federal government, firing watchdogs, removing Democratic appointees, and dismantling regulatory bodies. His administration has cited the “unitary executive theory,” which interprets Article II of the Constitution as granting the president complete control over executive branch personnel and functions.
Trump himself has previously declared, “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.” The administration’s actions include placing federal diversity, equity, and inclusion staff on leave, firing prosecutors involved in January 6 cases, and offering buyouts to millions of federal employees.
“I think that means he has the power to control subordinates throughout the executive branch, including in the independent agencies, and how they exercise power. And as a corollary to that, he has the power to remove or fire subordinates in the executive branch,” said Steven Calabresi, a leading advocate of the unitary executive theory.
TRUMP: "It's a thing called Article 2. Nobody ever mentions Article 2. It gives me all of these rights at a level that nobody has ever seen before." 😳 pic.twitter.com/63gooeYLQ1
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 12, 2019
Resistance from Democratic Appointees
Trump’s efforts to clean house have met significant resistance from Democratic appointees who claim their removals violate statutory protections. Richard Trumka Jr., a member of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, publicly defied his termination, stating, “I’ve got more work to do here in service of you and your family, and the president does not have the authority to remove me. So I won’t take this lying down. See you in court, Mr. President.”
At least five Democratic appointees have been reinstated by court rulings, including commissioners at the Consumer Product Safety Commission and members of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. Alexander Hoehn-Saric, another CPSC member, criticized the administration, saying, “Although done in the name of ‘efficiency,’ these cuts have simply caused chaos. By crippling core government functions, the Administration is making communities throughout this great nation less safe and life harder.”
.@PressSec: “President Trump is not shy of resistance — Clearly, there are left-wing activists who sit behind a bench in a courthouse who don’t like this President and his policies but the fact is everything President Trump is doing is within his executive authority.” pic.twitter.com/U9mczCIbC6
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 16, 2025
Constitutional Showdown Looming
The ongoing legal battles are setting up what could become a major Supreme Court test of presidential powers. Critics argue Trump is overstepping constitutional boundaries by infringing on powers designated to Congress and violating established systems of checks and balances.
Former White House counsel Bob Bauer framed the debate: “This is where the debate is: at what point does the kind of power that Trump wants and the way he exercises his power cross over from a constitutional vision about presidential power to an a-constitutional vision?” The White House maintains Trump is working to reorganize the executive branch to ensure accountability and fulfill his campaign promises to voters.
Trump’s agenda extends beyond personnel changes to controlling federal spending and dismantling entire agencies, such as USAID and the Department of Education. Legal experts anticipate ongoing institutional challenges, but warn that the immediate impact of Trump’s actions may cause long-term damage to federal institutions regardless of how courts ultimately rule on his authority.