The relationship between the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branch could be likened to three bickering siblings: disputing over petty issues as they stubbornly refuse to compromise, postponing the debates of important topics. Congress has developed a shameless habit of instituting filibusters to derail the topics under discussion and, in order to resolve this, Presidents willingly introduce Executive Orders to further their political agenda regarding hot-topic issues ranging from immigration to gun control to minimum wage.

In the past several years, Congress has become increasingly unbending in their beliefs and their ability to compromise is visibly lacking to the public and political figures alike, forcing Presidents to use an alarming amount of Executive Orders. What was once used in times of turmoil to rescue the American public if necessary, is now a normal procedure overused by the past several presidential generations. In short, Executive Orders give Presidents an exuberant amount of power and the public questions our Presidents’ use of Executive Orders. Do these orders disregard the three-branch system and sacrifice the voice of the American public? Have political leaders become so divided that Executive Orders are, in fact, necessary to accomplish anything in the American government? Can we not have trust in our political system to make informed decisions based on the wellbeing of the American people? Why must we fall to centralizing power to a single person, rather than utilize the informed opinions of other political leaders?

Technically speaking, Executive Orders are permitted and considered an act necessary to ignite positive change in our country. On the other hand, the over usage of Executive Orders will create an asymmetric political system, therefore establishing deeper tension between the parties, branches of government, and political figures. In addition, Executive Orders have the tendency to undermine the legitimacy of previous Presidents and Congress alike. If the President feels as if he/she must rely on Executive Orders to impose regulations and laws since Congress will refuse to compromise, this defines their relationship as toxic and negative. Yet the American people must place trust in this dysfunctional institution.

Put simply, the overall support of Executive Orders will depend on whether the President is Democrat or Republican. When President Trump announced the Executive Order regarding immigration earlier this year, millions of Republicans suddenly supported the use of Executive Orders. In contrast, when President Obama signed his own Executive Order concerning immigration in 2012, Republicans were outraged at the idea that an Executive Order dealing with immigration could be signed. The problem boils down to Congress. If Congress had been slightly more willing to compromise with President Obama, dozens of his Executive Orders would have been avoided. The gridlock the Republicans in Congress created only caused problems in Washington and discredited the beliefs of the opposing party.

Regarding Executive Orders, there is a fine line to walk when Presidents begin to sign more of these orders. It becomes a question of how to determine if an order is a necessity and if so will intact positive change in the future. In the current political world, Executive Orders must be used to accomplish anything in the governmental institution. It is worrying that the current President’s Executive Orders have received incredibly negative responses, yet they continue to overflow the government. Overall, for the next four years, Democratic members of Congress should fear the usage of Executive Orders that disregard their opinion and silence their voice. Hopefully, Republican Congress members will see that their inability to compromise has created this plague of Executive Orders.