Trump's Executive Power Grab That Could Reshape the U.S. Government

President Donald Trump has taken an audacious step in his relentless push for absolute executive power. His latest executive order extends White House control over independent federal agencies, a move that past presidents—Republicans and Democrats alike—have considered but ultimately abandoned due to its questionable legality and blatant attack on checks and balances.

In a sweeping decree issued Tuesday, Trump ordered independent agencies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Trade Commission to submit to White House oversight. These agencies, designed to function outside of direct presidential influence, play a critical role in everything from corporate regulation to campaign finance enforcement. Yet Trump, emboldened by a Supreme Court that has increasingly backed his authoritarian tendencies, is attempting to bring them under his thumb.

Why This Power Grab Matters

Congress established independent agencies for a reason: to keep certain government functions—like financial market regulation and consumer protection—insulated from partisan politics. The SEC, for example, ensures corporate accountability, while the Federal Trade Commission prevents monopolistic practices. The Federal Election Commission enforces campaign finance laws.

Yet Trump’s radical legal theory—that the president should have near-total control over the executive branch—has been steadily gaining traction among conservative legal circles. The 6-3 conservative Supreme Court majority has signaled its willingness to entertain such arguments, putting decades of established governance norms at risk.

“For at least a century, we’ve understood that certain government functions should be removed from political interference as much as possible,” said Christopher Walker, a University of Michigan law professor. “Trump’s order represents a dramatic shift.”

How Trump’s Order Shifts Power

Traditionally, federal agencies submit regulations for White House review through the Office of Management and Budget. However, independent agencies have long been exempt from this requirement—until now.

Past administrations, including Ronald Reagan’s, considered imposing such oversight but ultimately backed down, understanding that it violated the very nature of these agencies' independence. Even Trump’s own Department of Justice deemed it unnecessary in 2019. Yet now, with no restraints and a Supreme Court seemingly in his pocket, he has decided to move forward.

Under Trump’s new order, independent agencies must submit their regulations for White House approval, which effectively grants the president direct control over policy decisions that Congress deliberately shielded from executive interference. Trump’s justification? That these agencies wield “enormous power over the American people without presidential oversight.”

Progressive watchdogs are already sounding the alarm, calling the move “illegal” and a brazen handout to corporations.

“This is a profoundly dangerous idea,” said Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen. “Congress made these agencies independent for a reason—to protect the public interest. Trump wants to dismantle those protections and hand power to corporate elites.”

Beyond the regulatory review, Trump’s order mandates that White House liaisons embed themselves within these agencies and that agency heads regularly coordinate with the president’s administration—a level of executive involvement that is virtually unheard of.

“This is a direct attack on independent governance,” warned Daniel Walters, a Texas A&M law professor. “Trump wants total control, and this is a step in that direction.”

Tied to Trump’s Political Purge

The timing of Trump’s order is no coincidence. It follows his aggressive campaign to purge officials from independent agencies, particularly those who have dared to challenge his administration. The Supreme Court is already weighing Trump’s controversial firing of Hampton Dellinger, the special counsel responsible for investigating whistleblower retaliation. Dellinger, appointed by President Biden, could have been a major roadblock in Trump’s efforts to gut the federal workforce.

Trump’s legal team argues that the laws protecting officials like Dellinger from politically motivated dismissal are unconstitutional—a position that, if upheld, could give the president unchecked authority to fire independent agency leaders at will.

And Dellinger isn’t the only target. Trump has also fired the chair of the federal Merit Systems Protection Board, and another case challenging his dismissal of a National Labor Relations Board member is currently under judicial review. All these firings follow a disturbing pattern: Trump is systematically removing officials who are supposed to operate independently of his political whims.

Legal scholars point to a 1935 Supreme Court ruling, Humphrey’s Executor v. U.S., which established that Congress has the right to require presidents to show cause—such as inefficiency or misconduct—before removing independent agency heads. However, today’s conservative Supreme Court justices have been chipping away at this precedent, with a 2020 ruling against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau serving as a major warning sign. That decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, struck down job protections for the head of the CFPB, arguing that they violated “separation of powers.”

Now, with Trump back in the White House and the Supreme Court leaning further right, it seems only a matter of time before similar protections for independent agencies are dismantled entirely.

Trump Avoids a Legal Battle Over the Fed—For Now

Interestingly, Trump’s order carves out an exception for the Federal Reserve, likely in an attempt to avoid an immediate legal showdown. During his first term, Trump frequently attacked the Fed’s leadership, particularly over interest rate policies. However, meddling too directly with the central bank would likely invite significant backlash—even from his conservative allies.

Still, legal experts argue that there’s little distinction between the Fed and the other agencies Trump is attempting to control. His decision to exclude the Fed appears to be a strategic move to avoid pushing the legal boundaries too far, too fast.

Who Gets to Interpret the Law?

Perhaps the most chilling part of Trump’s executive order is a provision suggesting that only he and his attorney general can provide “authoritative interpretations of law” for the executive branch. Some critics have interpreted this as Trump attempting to declare himself the ultimate arbiter of the law—an idea that fits with his recent social media proclamation that “he who saves his country does not violate any Law.”

While an executive order does not override the Constitution, the language in this directive raises serious concerns about Trump’s intentions. By asserting that all independent agencies must align their legal interpretations with the White House, he is signaling a dramatic consolidation of power that could erode the fundamental checks and balances of American democracy.

This isn’t just about regulatory review. It’s about Trump’s broader mission to dismantle any remaining barriers to his authority. And with a Supreme Court stacked in his favor, there’s little standing in his way.