51吃瓜

Trump seeks to keep out dangerous immigrants, rejuvenate the energy industry and bring back manufacturing while waging war on the media and extolling torture.

As president of the United States, Donald Trump has got off the blocks more explosively than Usain Bolt. Proclamations, memoranda and executive orders have been flying off Trump鈥檚 pen. This author has been speaking to constitutional lawyers, academics and historians to find out if there is any precedent to this frenetic activity in the White House. Their unanimous answer is that Trump is following no precedent. Like the Starship Enterprise, Trump is exploring strange new worlds and is boldly going where no president has gone before.

In his聽, Trump vowed to cancel all of Barack Obama鈥檚 鈥渋llegal and overreaching executive orders.鈥� Ironically, Trump himself has been issuing executive orders with a vengeance, raising concerns about their propriety and constitutionality. Outrage and mass protests have resulted not only in the US, but around the world.

What is going on? What are executive orders? Why do Trump鈥檚 orders matter?

DECREES DESPITE A MINORITY MANDATE

Trump won the presidency with a minority of the vote. To say he is a divisive figure would be an understatement. Trump is an anti-establishment candidate who first took the Republican Party hostage, slaying among others Jeb Bush of a fabled clan that has produced two presidents. He then knocked out Hillary Clinton who had all the advantages of a huge donor network, party machine and mainstream media support. In numerous editions of聽The World This Week, this author argued that Trump won because Americans are hurting and their political elites have ignored them at their peril.

Now, Trump is firmly in the saddle and has a Republican majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. He can push through an aggressive legislative agenda. Instead, he has unfurled a flurry of activity without consulting Congress. In any case, executive orders have always been controversial because they do not require congressional approval. The US Constitution has enshrined the separation of powers with the legislature making the laws, the president executing them and the judiciary acting as the referee to ensure that everyone is playing by the rules. Trump鈥檚 unilateral decisions bypass Congress and are raising fears that he might rule by decree, threatening American democracy.

Trump鈥檚 supporters point out that presidents have always issued executive orders. As expected, Fox News has issued a聽聽and, as Bill O鈥橰eilly reassures, these are聽. Such orders can be revoked, modified or expanded. Passing laws is like making sausages and getting bills through the floor takes time. Executive orders allow the president to govern without being paralyzed by the legislature. Franklin D. Roosevelt used them a staggering 3,721 times in his 12 years, but it might be important to remember that he was in office during the Great Depression and World War II. Barack Obama and George W. Bush issued 279 and 291 orders respectively. They were controversial too, but Trump has instituted 鈥渁 shock and awe strategy鈥� that is shaking up the little town on the Potomac and the rest of the world.

OBAMACARE, INFRASTRUCTURE AND SANCTUARY CITIES

The best place to examine Trump鈥檚 executive orders is the聽聽itself. On January 20, the very day he took oath as president, Trump signed an executive order聽, the controversial Obamacare legislation.

Pending repeal of Obamacare, states can minimize 鈥渆conomic and regulatory burdens鈥� while also work toward creating 鈥渁 more free and open healthcare market.鈥� It also gives federal authorities the right 鈥渢o waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision or requirement of the Act that would impose a fiscal burden on any State鈥� or increase costs or regulations for patients, health care providers, insurers and pharmaceutical or medical device companies.

In brief, Trump has torpedoed the hull of the ship. USS Obamacare is damaged it if not sunk as yet.

On January 24, Trump issued the executive order聽. The order pointed out that infrastructure investment strengthens the economic platform of the country, 鈥渕akes America more competitive, creates millions of jobs, increases wages for American workers, and reduces the costs of goods and services for American families and consumers.鈥� From now on, if the White House decides a project is high priority, then approvals from various agencies will be fast tracked. Namby-pamby environmentalists can shriek their lungs out, but their protests will not matter one jot.

On January 25, the White House unfurled two executive orders. One of them is supposed to聽. Trump ordered strict enforcement of immigration laws and the deportation of illegal aliens, especially those that threatened national security or conducted criminal activity. He declared: 鈥淪anctuary jurisdictions across the United States willfully violate Federal law in an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States.鈥� The president went on to declare that those violating federal law would not be getting federal funding. In Trump鈥檚 words, sanctuary jurisdictions are causing 鈥渋mmeasurable harm to the American people and to the very fabric of our Republic.鈥�

Sanctuary jurisdictions comprise more than 400 cities, such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, New York and Boston, which do not allow officials to inquire about an individual鈥檚 immigration status.聽聽by telling its police force not to question people solely to determine their immigration status. Today, federal immigration laws exist on paper but are not enforced in these over 400 sanctuary jurisdictions. Local governments in these jurisdictions turn a blind eye to federal immigration laws to develop greater trust between the government and local communities, which helps keep tabs on public health issues as well as control crime. Conservative critics rail against them for flouting the law, appeasing minorities and winning their votes through identity politics.

Trump鈥檚 war on sanctuary jurisdictions has caused alarm. Unlike the United Kingdom, France or even India, the US is a truly federal country. States鈥� rights are a big deal and local areas guard their autonomy zealously. It is not without reason that聽聽during his travels through the country and was adamant that it made American democracy work. Trump鈥檚 executive order aims a salvo at the cherished American ideal of federalism itself that many in his party support religiously. Furthermore, many like Garrett Epps believe Trump鈥檚 executive order to be聽.

Epps鈥� sophisticated argument in聽The Atlantic聽draws upon on two major cases. In a 1997 case,聽Printz v. United States, the court held that the federal government may never order local officials to enforce federal law. In the famous 2012 Affordable Care Act case,聽National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, the court held that the government cannot use the threat of large funding cuts to 鈥渃oerce鈥� states into adopting federally demanded policies.

The so-called sanctuary jurisdictions will fight back and challenge this executive order. The matter will go all the way to the Supreme Court and will define federalism in the US.

THE WALL AND IMMIGRATION BAN

The second of the January 25 executive orders has caught media attention. It deals with聽. In the order, Trump declares that illegal aliens are 鈥渁 significant threat to national security and public safety.鈥� He goes on to say that many of them 鈥渟eek to harm Americans through acts of terror or criminal conduct.鈥� Therefore, Trump has directed all enforcement agencies to start detaining illegal aliens and kicking them out of the country.

More importantly, the new president has ordered 鈥渢he immediate construction of a physical wall on the southern border鈥� to prevent illegal immigration, terrorism and trafficking of drugs or human beings. The US will now build a 2,000-mile barrier and Trump insists that Mexico is going to fork out the cash 鈥�.鈥� This is his longstanding campaign promise. Those who were terribly upset by Trump鈥檚 proposition forget that George W. Bush signed into law聽. Like Trump, Bush was seeking to control American borders and reform the country鈥檚 immigration system. Trump might do well to remember that Bush failed miserably.

, a barrier already exists for a third of the southern border with Mexico. Trump might build on it or construct something entirely new. Construction on the wall will begin immediately with聽聽from the Department of Homeland Security, but Trump will need billions of dollars from Congress and the government will have to seize plenty of private property as well. The legal, logistical and political challenges to the wall are formidable. Yet Trump is riding a wave of concern about drug trafficking, crime and illegal immigration. Many who voted for him repeatedly chanted 鈥溾�� and are delighted that Trump is sticking to his promise.

Mexicans are not thrilled though. Enrique Pe帽a Nieto, its feckless president, has cancelled his visit to Washington, DC. He has vowed that聽. Trump has already floated the idea of聽聽that is not quite legal under treaties the US itself has drafted. Unsurprisingly, congressmen and senators are hopping like cats on a hot tin roof at the suggestion of arbitrary tariffs and the prospects of a looming trade war with Uncle Sam鈥檚 third largest trading partner.

As if the wall was not enough, on January 27, Trump issued an executive order aimed at 鈥�.鈥� He asserts that 鈥渄eteriorating conditions in certain countries due to war, strife, disaster, and civil unrest鈥� increase the likelihood that terrorists from these countries will use 鈥渁ny means possible鈥� to enter the US. Trump proclaimed in this order that 鈥渢he entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States.鈥� Trump also suspended visas and immigration benefits to 鈥淣ationals of Countries of Particular Concern鈥� for 90 days.

It turned out that nationals of only seven countries could not travel to the US: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya and Yemen. This order created pandemonium and panic. Those with green cards might also be affected. All countries on the list except for Iran are experiencing conflict and all of them are Muslim. On his campaign trail, Trump suggested聽聽and proposed killing the families of terrorists.

By his campaign standards, Trump鈥檚 executive order is rather mild. It does not ban Muslims per se. The most populous Muslim-majority countries are Indonesia, Pakistan and Bangladesh. None of them are affected by the ban. Yet many fear this may be the start of excluding Muslims from entering the US in much the same way as the Chinese were kicked out of America by the聽, which was supposed to be temporary but lasted until 1943.

On January 28, Trump signed yet another executive order banning all those appointed to office from lobbying activities for five years after they leave. It is part of his campaign to 鈥渄rain the swamp鈥� of Washington that many rightly believe to be wallowing in corruption, intrigue and primacy of special interests.聽聽by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Clinton, who is often referred to as Slick Willie, revoked his order in his final weeks in office so his colleagues could turn into gold diggers once they left office. Even Obama granted waivers to his order. Time will tell if Trump can walk his talk when his subordinates leave government and try to cash in later on.

TRADE AND ABORTION OUT

Executive orders are not the only thing that Trump is signing. Trump has signed a memorandum formally聽聽of the massive 12-nation聽Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal. Obama and numerous American diplomats spent plenty of time, money and energy to negotiate a deal that comprises 40% of the global economy. This was part of the so-called 鈥淎sia Pivot鈥� and a central tenet of聽the Obama Doctrine, which sought to disentangle the US from the messy Middle East, pivot American focus to Asia and manage the rise of China. Trump has now thrown the Asia Pivot overboard into the sea.

Trump has also ordered a federal hiring freeze that covers all arms of the government except the military. He has got off to a flying start in delivering the聽聽that Ronald Reagan promised but did not quite manage to deliver, at least as far as the number of federal employees go. Trump has brought back聽聽that barred aid to any group that provides or 鈥減romotes鈥� abortion overseas. This means that if an African or Latin American organization uses US aid to provide contraception to women, it will have to stop taking aid from others to conduct abortions. It will also have to stop providing women with referrals, counseling or information about abortion, even in the case of rape, incest and danger to the mother鈥檚 life.

51吃瓜鈥檚 November edition of聽Africa This Month聽warned that Trump might institute such a policy, and it has sadly been proven right. Prior to Trump, George W. Bush followed the same policy and its effects, as the article pointed out, were catastrophic. In writing that edition, the authors were surprised to discover research at Stanford that found that Bush鈥檚 policy led to an increase in abortions because it restricted access to contraception and increased unwanted pregnancy.

In any case, it is always men who seem to take such decisions. The Catholic Church is still an all-male club when it comes rule-making, and its stand on abortion is unsurprisingly still hardline. Martin Belam and Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett of聽The Guardian聽rightly remark that the photo of聽聽signing an order as to what women could do with their reproductive organs was highly patriarchal and fundamentally unjust.

PIPELINES AND TORTURE IN

Trump has cleared the way for the聽聽from Alberta to Nebraska and North Dakota to Illinois respectively. The Sioux聽聽against the second pipeline, but that is not going to stop the pipeline with Trump in charge. His mandate that all pipeline projects must use American-made steel might slow down projects and drive their costs up. It is not only another blow against trade and a reversion to protectionism, but also a rejection of Obama鈥檚 environmental policy and an embrace of fossil fuels.

Trump has also ordered a regulatory freeze. Climate change has disappeared from the White House website. Instead, the new focus is on 鈥渞educing burdensome regulations on our energy industry.鈥� The White House chief of staff has come out with a memo freezing new or pending regulations. According to聽The Washington Post, this memo sinks聽. Another memo by Trump himself, orders the secretary of commerce to streamline and reduce regulatory burdens on domestic manufacturing.

Apart from his formal actions, Trump is setting a toxic tone as the world鈥檚 most powerful man. In the May 1, 2016, edition of The World This Week, this author argued that聽Trump has a point. Globalization has led to winners and losers. The former never compensated the latter and big banks profited from the suffering of the common man. Trump is riding on the anger of a large section of the US that feels exploited, ignored and betrayed. The tragedy is that he is fanning that anger and using rhetoric unbecoming of his office.

Right at the outset,聽聽despite evidence to the contrary. His chief spokesman harangued reporters and launched a blistering attack on the media with an aggression that has not been seen before. Trump has publicly obsessed over voter fraud and has repeatedly claimed that millions of illegal votes were cast, undermining faith in American democracy.

Finally, he has argued that聽. In Trump鈥檚 eyes, if the Islamic State is cutting off heads, then Americans must retaliate with waterboarding at least. He misses the irony that Uncle Sam聽聽for practicing waterboarding. Trump wants 鈥渢o fight fire with fire鈥� without temperance, morality or mercy.

Good luck America!

*[You can receive 鈥淭he World This Week鈥� directly in your inbox by subscribing to our mailing list. Simply visit聽51吃瓜聽and enter your email address in the space provided. Meanwhile, please find below five of our finest articles for the week.]

Democracy in a Nation Divided

漏 RiverNorthPhotography

It聽is time for all of America鈥檚 institutions of democracy to engage, activate the citizenry and make its democracy function as it should.

鈥淭he tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants,鈥� said Thomas Jefferson, America鈥檚 third president.

This quote came to mind in the aftermath of the US presidential election and Donald J. Trump鈥檚 improbable victory. Not because a literal bloodletting is in the offing, though we may very well see a figurative one. But rather because America鈥檚 tree of liberty is in need of refreshing, shaking up or even repotting in more fertile soil. Its democratic roots need new nourishment. So, in that sense, Jefferson may have been on to something. Can it be that Americans have grown complacent of their democracy? They vote鈥攚ell,聽barely half聽the country. They pay their taxes鈥攖hough of some we can鈥檛 be sure. And a very small number serve in鈥� Read more

Are Theresa May鈥檚 Brexit Hopes Farfetched?

漏聽Adam Petto

In聽a聽sudden move to pin all of the UK鈥檚 post-Brexit hopes on America鈥檚 mercurial strongman, does Theresa May know what she is getting herself into?

In her long-awaited speech on January 17, British Prime Minister Theresa May finally clarified the phrase聽鈥淏rexit means Brexit.鈥� Despite previous assurances that the Conservative government would pursue 鈥渁 mature cooperative relationship with the EU [European Union],鈥澛爐he prime minister鈥檚 plan聽now unequivocally point toward a 鈥渉ard Brexit鈥� that will see the United Kingdom opt out of free movement of people, leave the single market and seek a new arrangement for the customs union. In doing so, May is not just jeopardizing Britain鈥檚 economic prosperity. She is also betraying the silent majority that most definitely did not vote for this kind of extreme rupture.

In the referendum鈥檚 aftermath, a narrow victory for the Leave campaign has somehow been recast as a clear, unambiguous demand from the British people for slash-and-burn Brexit that鈥� Read more

President Trump Should Invest in Southern Syria鈥檚 Rebels

漏 TzahiV

By聽increasing its investment in the Southern Front, the Trump administration can secure some of the most important areas of Syria.

The Syrian opposition movement has come to an inflection point from which it will be irreversibly changed鈥攚ith significant consequences for the stability of the Middle East and the ongoing US-led campaign against the聽Islamic State聽(IS). The recent fall of the rebel-ruled districts of the northern city of Aleppo to the聽Bashar al-Assad聽government is leading to perhaps the starkest example of the new normal in Syria: trilateral talks between Russia, Turkey and Iran to end the civil war, cutting out the United States and the Syrian opposition鈥檚 High Negotiations Committee.

While the civil war may not immediately end, and the forces loyal to and allied with Assad still not numerous enough to recapture all areas of Syria that are opposition-controlled, 2017 will witness the steady transformation of the opposition. The聽Trump administration聽has the ability鈥� Read more

Gambian Security Forces Take a Gamble

漏 mtcurado

Gambian security chiefs have put their professionalism and loyalty to the constitution in question.

The relevance of聽the military and other security institutions in a democratic state has never been questioned. It is a concern that was raised 2,500 years ago by Plato and subsequent scholars. Principles of representative democracy guarantee political control of the armed and security forces. The concept of popular sovereignty established the supremacy of civilian institutions over military and other security institutions.

In a democratic dispensation, relations between society and the armed and security forces are expected to be a two-way process. In a constitutional democracy, both the state and the armed and security forces should be protected by the constitution from potential dangers of both military men with political desires and politicians with聽military ambitions. These are the two dangers that Yahya Jammeh, his Alliance for Patriotic and Reorientation and Construction (APRC) party and the security apparatus in The Gambia refused to understand鈥�. Read more

Bollywood Still Hasn鈥檛 Changed

漏 Edward Derule

In聽India, the status quo of gender is promoted in popular culture.

Reading through a聽Times of India聽article from 2013, 鈥淚nternational Women鈥檚 Day: Bollywood and its bold women characters,鈥� I was excited to see the names of movies I had watched, like聽Mother India聽(1957), Aandhi聽(Storm 1974) and聽English Vinglish聽(2012). I could relate to what it meant by 鈥渂old鈥� characters. Compared to other mainstream movies with male protagonists, these films did have strong roles for women. Bold, because they were performing outside of defined roles.

But, as usual, most Bollywood films have male protagonists. Will a few movies with 鈥渂old鈥� female characters make any difference? What about the women in other mainstream Bollywood movies? Looking at two films by Karan Johar鈥�Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham聽(A While of Happiness and A While of Sorrow, 2001) and聽Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna聽(Never Bid Goodbye, 2006)鈥攎ight help understand how women聽are characterized in mainstream Bollywood movies鈥�. Read more

The views expressed in this article are the author鈥檚 own and do not necessarily reflect 51吃瓜鈥檚 editorial policy.

Photo Credit: