The Left Not So Happy With The Monster They Created

Manhattan Contrarian ^ | 13 Jun, 2025 | Francis Menton

[MtnClimber]

The pervasive talking point of the Left since President Trump returned to office is that he is trying to make himself into a “dictator.” Starting in the early weeks of his new term, the main evidence for the “dictator” claim was said to be Trump’s actions to make the government respond to his policies, via actions like large-scale lay-offs, issuance of Executive Orders, and cancellation of grants and contracts. (Here for example is a piece from the Guardian from February 13, complaining of what they called Trump’s “illegitimate power grab” by, among other things, cancelling grants and downsizing agencies from USAID to the CFPB. See also, numerous comments on this site from frequent commenter Richard Greene.)

And now, in recent weeks, the “dictator” rhetoric has ramped up to a new level, specifically in response to Trump’s assertive enforcement of the immigration laws. The new claim is that Trump is trying to make himself the “King.” Culminating the week of anti-ICE riots centered in Los Angeles, we now will have tomorrow (Saturday June 14) a nationwide mobilization using the branding “No Kings.” Here is their website. According to the AP, there will be in the range of 2,000 demonstrations, at least one in most every significant city around the country.

“No Kings” helpfully provides us with a list of its “Partners” — some 209 of them by my count. It’s a who’s who of institutions of the Left. A few examples include the ACLU, “Bernie,” League of Conservation Voters, MoveOn.org, Planned Parenthood, the Vermont Public Interest Research Group; labor unions like the Communications Workers of America and SEIU; environmental/climate activist groups like 350.org, Greenpeace and the Sierra Club; and so on and on. No Kings does not specify what level of support a group must provide to become a “partner, “ but a good bet would be that there is substantial funding involved.

Data Republican has already produced an extensive spreadsheet of federal money that flows, directly or indirectly, to the groups listed as the No Kings Partners. The total federal funding flowing through to these groups far exceeds a billion dollars, although perhaps not all within one year.

But what is it about what Trump is doing that makes him more like a “dictator” than prior presidents? That he expects his subordinates to follow his directions or get fired? In the Guardian piece linked above, the writer (Robert Tait) seeks out long time Yale Law School professor Bruce Ackerman to learn the legal theory of the opposition. Here is the key quote from Ackerman:

“It is not the case that the president can dominate the policy making of all institutions in the executive branch,” he said. “And in particular, the president can’t fire people or members of these commissions. Even less, can he through unilateral action, simply destroy two independent commissions.”

It seems that 50+ years as a professor at Yale Law (I had him as a teacher in 1972!) have not left Ackerman with enough time to read the actual Constitution. Or maybe he skipped over the first line of Article II, Section 1, which states that “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” If that doesn’t mean that the President can “dominate the policy making of all institutions in the executive branch,” it’s hard to know what it might mean.

The problem here is that the Left thought that they had gotten around the Constitution with decades of progressive-inspired legislation designed to create a government of permanent experts that would tie the hands of any President who might have different policy ideas. The main legislative restraints were the creation of the so-called “independent commissions,” run by commissioners who could only be removed for “cause,” and civil service laws restricting the firing of career government employees. The “independent commissions” had been upheld in a 1935 Supreme Court case called Humphrey’s Executor.

To learn more about the issue, go to my January 31, 2025 post titled “Next Up: Humphrey’s Executor,” where I predicted the demise of that terrible precedent. On May 22, the Supreme Court, in a case called Trump v. Wilcox, reversed a lower court preliminary ruling and permitted Trump, at least pending litigation, to fire “independent” commissioners of the NLRB and the Merit Systems Protection Board. Key quote:

Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, see Art. II, §1, cl. 1, he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf. . . .

That doesn’t leave much wiggle room. The NPR piece reporting on the Supreme Court’s decision notes that, although it is preliminary, it expresses a rationale so thoroughly inconsistent with Humphrey’s Executor that it is highly unlikely for that precedent to survive. NPR’s Nina Totenberg says that although the decision is temporary, “the tone is pretty final.” (A final decision in the case is not expected until some time next year at the earliest.)

I suspect that very few of the No Kings agitators are aware of the thin ice on which Humphrey’s Executor now skates, let alone of Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, or of what these issues mean for their assertion that Trump is somehow acting as a “dictator” or “king.”

For a while — multiple decades — they thought they had achieved a perfect model for unbreakable left-wing governance. When a Democrat was President, he could exercise all executive functions because the commissions and bureaucracy would support him as part of their team; but when a Republican got elected, he would be boxed in by the commissions and bureaucrats who would assure continuance of the policies of the progressive groupthink, with maybe a handful of tweaks around the edges.

Now it looks like all kinds of policies can actually get changed by an election. Vast agencies and bureaucracies put in place in the expectation of a permanent government groupthink impervious to elections, now find themselves fully under the control of the elected President, and turning to a whole new direction. “Dictator”? Actually, that’s what the Constitution provides. If you don’t want a President with so much power, it would have been much better not to have created so many agencies and delegated so much power to the executive. You complain that Trump is acting like a “dictator,” but what is actually happening is that you created a monster that you thought you could control, and now you find out that you can’t control it.

---

TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: leftism; r

[MtnClimber]

Manhattan Contrarian ping

[sauropod]

.

[Hazwaste]

It was a Democrat president who said it best, “The Buck Stops Here”.

[FreedomPoster]

The real answer is to dial back the money sent to the FedGov and let the states solve problems. Less money => less power for the executive.

[hecticskeptic]

....Vast agencies and bureaucracies put in place in the expectation of a permanent government groupthink impervious to elections, now find themselves fully under the control of the elected President, and turning to a whole new direction.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I’m oft reminded of the approach Maggie Thatcher took in Britain. The unions had the nation in a headlock when she became the PM and she essentially smashed them....

[hal ogen]

The parasitic class (Fed employees and their “upper-level” managers) are a significant problem (especially the super GS executive level). These pathetic bureaucrats have been given incredible powers over the decades to where they feel they are indispensable.

Guess what? They are not indispensable.

The President is their “boss”. Hopefully, he will continue to stir the pot by eliminating many of them as is possible.

[oldtech]

Never felt like Mr. Trump was trying to be a king, but he does take a large bit of control for the nation, which is planned for in our Constitution. Still, some do not like this; I guess they think it gives him too much power & control. In this situation we are in, isn’t it better to act a little bit “kingly” than to play the part of a fool?

[mewzilla]

Deep State is not just federal.

It’s also local, county, state...

Dial back ALL bureaucracy.

Insist that citizens take responsibility for themselves and each other.

A nanny state and our republic cannot coexist.

[PeterPrinciple]

The real answer is to dial back the money sent to the FedGov and let the states solve problems. Less money => less power for the executive.

---

Folks,

I agree. But remember that is not a magic bullet. Evil/corruption just moves around and it still requires diligence on our part. Targets are closer to us in the local community but corruption is still in our local community.

[DownInFlames]

Trump is no dictator, a bully? Yes, just like teddy Rosevelt. If Israel succeeds, with trumps backing, the world may have been saved. Radical Islam with nuclear weapons is a frightening thought. We have seen 46 years of state sponsored terrorism from the ayatollah’s, kidnapping, murder, and attacks on shipping. Israel has the balls to pull this off and show the world just how bad Russian, Chinese, and NOK weaponry is.

Next, it will be Russia that falls and hopefully before Christmas. With the example of their weapon systems and huge losses in Ukraine, it shouldn’t take long. They are down to using motorcycles to move troops. What’s next, horses?

[FreedomPoster]

Totally agree.

I was having a quick lunch at the bar of a nice local restaurant a couple weeks ago. Struck up a friendly conversation with a couple of well-off looking Millennial guys sitting next to me. Definite Trump voters.

One of the things I told them was they needed to give up some sportyball watching to pay attention to local politics. That just getting Trump elected was not going to solve our problems. This is not necessarily a welcome message, especially here in SEC country.

I have more than done my part on the local politics part, and continue to be involved.

[teeman8r]

“I was having a quick lunch at the bar of a nice local restaurant a couple weeks ago. Struck up a friendly conversation with a couple of well-off looking Millennial guys sitting next to me. Definite Trump voters.

One of the things I told them was they needed to give up some sportyball watching to pay attention to local politics.”

i would have told you i can do both...