In just over a week into his second presidency, Donald Trump has reignited fears that he seeks to wield near-unlimited executive authority. His latest move—a temporary freeze on federal aid—has thrown programs like Meals on Wheels and low-income housing assistance into limbo, sparking nationwide confusion and a legal battle that could redefine the scope of presidential power.
A Chaotic Start to Trump’s Second Term
The funding freeze, announced via a memo from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), ordered a temporary pause on “all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance.” While Medicare and individual assistance programs were exempt, the vague language left state governments, local leaders, and NGOs scrambling to determine which programs were affected.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt struggled to clarify the scope of the freeze during her briefing, unable to confirm whether Medicaid was included. By evening, a federal judge temporarily halted the freeze, citing the government’s inability to specify which programs were impacted.
A Constitutional Crisis in the Making
The funding freeze is not just a logistical nightmare—it’s a direct challenge to the separation of powers. By attempting to redirect or halt funds already appropriated by Congress, Trump is testing the limits of presidential authority.
“It is a direct challenge against Congress and its ability to approve and authorize the expenditure of money,” said Donald Kettl, former dean of the University of Maryland School of Public Policy.
Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy, defended the move, claiming it was necessary to stop bureaucrats from funding “wicked and pernicious” policies. Leavitt echoed this sentiment, arguing that Trump was elected to scrutinize federal spending.
However, critics warn that Trump’s actions undermine the Constitution. “Winning an election doesn’t give a president the right to ignore the law,” said Corey Brettschneider, a constitutional law professor at Brown University. “The idea of democracy is that laws bind not just citizens, but even the president.”
A Pattern of Power Grabs
The funding freeze is just the latest in a series of controversial moves by Trump that suggest a disregard for constitutional limits. Earlier this month, he summarily dismissed more than a dozen Justice Department prosecutors, despite their civil service protections. He has also pushed to repeal birthright citizenship, a move that appears to conflict with the Constitution.
These actions reflect Trump’s belief that the presidency grants him near-unilateral authority. “The White House Counsel’s Office believes that this is within the President’s power to do it, and therefore, he’s doing it,” Leavitt said during her briefing.
A Supreme Court Showdown Looms
The funding freeze is almost certain to end up in the Supreme Court, where Trump’s conservative majority could further expand presidential powers. Last year, the Court granted Trump substantial immunity for official acts, paving the way for more executive overreach.
“Trump sees the presidency quite differently—that he is empowered to do whatever he wants,” Brettschneider said. “And that really is a vision of authoritarian control.”
Political Fallout and Public Backlash
The freeze has also sparked significant political backlash. While Trump’s core supporters are unlikely to waver, the chaos has overshadowed the disciplined rollout of his second term. It has also highlighted the critical role of federal programs that Trump aims to cut, potentially alienating moderate voters.
As legal battles unfold, one thing is clear: Trump’s presidency is testing the resilience of America’s democratic institutions. Whether the courts and Congress can rein in his ambitions remains to be seen.
