American administrations have always had to justify themselves against criticism of their muscular interventions abroad. But Donald Trump’s comments, a few hours after the strike in Venezuela, clashed with the usual speeches.
Published at
“We are going to make the oil flow again,” the president said, mentioning oil interests several times – even when the journalists’ questions did not relate to this subject. What should we remember from this apparent lack of embarrassment from the administration?
“It’s astonishing how much the narrative around intervention in Venezuela has changed in the space of a few days,” notes Stephen Farnsworth of the University of Mary Washington in Virginia. “Initially the focus was on fighting drug trafficking, but attention quickly shifted to access to oil. »
Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores are indeed facing several charges before the American courts in connection with drug trafficking. But this is not what Trump insisted on after the January 3 operation. Nor on a return to democracy.
“I think we are seeing a change in dynamic in the administration’s speeches, a more direct assertion,” adds Mr. Farnsworth. There is a more offensive orientation towards unilateral statements and unilateral actions. »
A particular style
Trump’s supporters have long admired his blunt retorts and brawling style, contrasting with the duplicity seen in other career politicians. His shocking statements are not new.
Surrounded by loyal collaborators, having succeeded in bringing down prestigious universities, large law firms and foreign leaders, Trump nevertheless seems to have become emboldened during his second term, both within American borders and abroad. Last week, he told the New York Times that the only element that could slow him down on the world stage is his “own morality”, having “no need for international law”, since his intention was not “to harm people”.
“I think he is now more comfortable with his role, and more aware of the extent of the powers of Article II of the Constitution,” says Shannon O’Brien of the University of Texas at Austin.
Constitutional powers
The first article of the Constitution grants legislative powers to Congress, composed of the elected representatives of the Senate and the House of Representatives. But Article II – not to be confused with the Second Amendment to the Constitution, on the right to own arms – “grants” executive power to the President of the United States. The wording allows for a broad interpretation of presidential prerogatives.
“Previous presidents were traditionally rather subjugated by the function, and tried not to cross certain lines,” says Mme O’Brien. But I don’t think Trump feels bound by the same constraints. »
Already, in 2019, he asserted that Article II gave him “the right to do what (he) wants as president,” an assertion denied by constitutional law experts.
It is under this article that a president can sign executive orders, which allow policies to be put in place quickly, without going through Congress.
But the limits of presidential powers will be tested again this year.
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court is expected to announce new decisions this Wednesday. The magistrates do not reveal in advance an agenda which would allow them to know which judgments will be published. Their opinion on the constitutionality of the customs duties imposed by Trump without going through Congress is particularly awaited.
The judges must also rule this year on the legality of the withdrawal of soil rights for children born in the United States to non-citizen parents and on layoffs in public agencies, in particular.
Trump’s outspokenness allowed him to establish his authority. But his words could also harm him in future cases. The chairman of the Fed, for example, quickly indicated that the investigation recently opened against him by the Department of Justice was the “consequence” of not obeying the president, who publicly questioned him on several occasions on interest rates.
While Trump admires strength and can use very direct language, he expects to be treated with deference. In the United States as elsewhere.
“We see that the second term is marked by much greater loyalty around him,” observes Mr. Farnsworth. For foreign leaders too, it is clear that not being on good terms with Trump can lead to problems. We saw this particularly in the case of certain tariff decisions, taken based on Trump’s feelings towards a leader. »
Question : “Could Donald Trump cancel the midterm elections? “, asked several readers.
Answer : Every two years, the 435 seats in the House of Representatives and a third of the senators’ positions are at stake. Donald Trump knows that his majority is slim and that the Republicans could lose control of Congress on November 4. But the president does not, theoretically, have the power to cancel midterm elections unilaterally. It is the states, under the supervision of Congress, that manage elections – hence the rules vary from state to state, even for federal elections. But a lot could happen between now and November. States have announced their intention to redraw their electoral maps, for example. A judge in October blocked an executive order requiring proof of citizenship to vote, clarifying that election rules were the responsibility of states and Congress. But States could adopt such measures for their territory. The Supreme Court is also expected to rule this year on a 1965 law that prevents changes that dilute the vote of traditionally discriminated minorities, which could also give Republicans an advantage if judges find it unconstitutional.
