The Imperial Presidency

Historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. popularized the term in his 1973 book The Imperial Presidency, arguing that since the Second World War Presidents had steadily claimed powers the Constitution assigned to Congress, especially the power to take the country to war, and had used secrecy and claims of national security to escape accountability. Writing amid the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal, he traced the trend through Presidents of both parties, culminating in Richard Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia, impoundment of appropriated funds, and abuse of executive privilege.

Congress responded in the 1970s with a wave of laws meant to restore balance, including the War Powers Resolution of 1973, the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the National Emergencies Act of 1976, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, the Inspector General Act of 1978, and the Ethics in Government Act of 1978. By the late 1970s some observers described an imperiled presidency instead, as Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter struggled with a more assertive Congress. The debate revived after the September 11 attacks, over surveillance, detention, and interrogation, and continued through expanded use of executive orders and emergency powers.

The term is again in wide use in debates over the second Trump administration since 2025, including the removal of independent agency officials, the dismantling of agencies, the impoundment of funds, tariffs imposed under emergency laws, and domestic military deployments. Supporters of a strong presidency say the President is the only official elected by the whole nation and that energetic leadership is needed when Congress is gridlocked. Critics say Congress has ceded too much power and courts too often defer. Both sides note that powers claimed by one President pass to successors of the other party.