Senator Elizabeth Warren argues that the separation of powers is not self-enforcing; it depends on each branch jealously guarding its own authority. A constitutional crisis arises when Congress becomes compliant and allows the executive branch to usurp its powers.

Related Insights

Senator Warren notes that resistance to banning congressional stock trading isn't confined to one political party. She observes that politicians from both sides of the aisle have been resistant to passing new laws, making it a bipartisan problem that requires voter pressure to solve.

Janet Napolitano argues that recent Supreme Court doctrines presume a level of legislative clarity and capability that doesn't exist in modern politics. By expecting Congress to legislate with extreme precision on all major issues, the Court ignores institutional dysfunction and creates a standard the legislative branch cannot meet.

Representative Sharice Davids points out a common public misconception fueled by presidential rhetoric. Presidents often say "I passed this law," but their constitutional role is limited to signing or vetoing bills. The actual, complex work of drafting, negotiating, and passing legislation is the exclusive domain of Congress, a fact often obscured in political messaging.

Congress uses its spending power to enact policies in areas where it lacks direct authority, like education or local transport. By offering "conditional spending," it creates powerful incentives for states to comply with federal standards to receive necessary funds.

This authority isn't from a single clause. It combines Section 8's power to spend with Section 9's *prohibition* on drawing money from the Treasury without a legislated appropriation. This limitation is what grants Congress exclusive control over federal spending.

The legislative process is notoriously slow, but this is an intentional feature. The Constitution's structure creates a deliberative, messy process to ensure that laws with nationwide impact are not passed hastily. This "inefficiency" functions as a crucial check on power, forcing negotiation and preventing rapid, potentially harmful policy shifts.

Beyond headline-grabbing scandals, the most insidious impact of a kleptocratic administration is its refusal to enforce existing laws, from financial regulations to anti-corruption acts. This quiet dismantling of the legal framework fosters a culture of impunity where bad actors thrive, ultimately harming ordinary people and destabilizing the entire system.

Senator Warren argues the problem with congressional stock trading isn't just access to non-public information. It's that members can actively shape legislation (e.g., a crypto bill) to benefit their own investments, creating a powerful conflict of interest.

Historian Anne Applebaum observes that significant US constitutional amendments often follow profound national traumas like the Revolution or the Civil War. This suggests that without a similar large-scale crisis, mustering the collective will to address deep-seated issues like systemic corruption is historically difficult, as there is no single moment of reckoning.

The Suspension Clause, which allows for suspending the right to challenge unlawful detention, is located in Article 1. This placement explicitly assigns the power to Congress, not the President, serving as a critical check on executive overreach during emergencies.