The President Who Would Not Be King

More about the book

Vital perspectives for the divided Trump era on what the Constitution's framers intended regarding presidential power are explored in this insightful examination. One of the key challenges faced by the framers was establishing a robust executive branch without creating a monarchy. In today's contentious political landscape, the extent of presidential power is fiercely debated. This work cuts through partisan divides to clarify the Constitution's guidance on presidential authority. Michael McConnell offers a thorough analysis of how presidential powers were drafted. Since the framers conducted their discussions privately, their evolving drafts are crucial for understanding their intentions. McConnell highlights how they referenced the powers of the British monarch and intentionally omitted certain authorities to prevent tyranny. Each power is examined in context, shedding light on its original understanding at the nation's founding. The author also presents a framework for assessing separation of powers claims, distinguishing between those powers subject to congressional oversight and those where the president has full authority. Based on the Tanner Lectures at Princeton University, this work revives the framers' original vision, illustrating how the Constitution curbs the potential for an imperial presidency while still enabling effective governance by the executive branch.