Trump's Enabling Act of 2025

We are underreacting to arguably the most frightening proclamation to ever be issued from the White House. Please read and share with your network.

Photo by Piotr Makowski on Unsplash

Recent events warranting your immediate attention have drawn awful parallels between contemporary American governance and historical patterns of democratic erosion which led to the worst calamity the world has ever seen.

Donald Trump's February 18 executive order on independent regulatory agencies "is his most blatant power grab" and presents troubling similarities to Nazi Germany's 1933 Enabling Act (Ermächtigungsgesetz).

These are my thoughts about its implications.

The order, titled "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies", fundamentally restructures the relationship between the executive branch and independent federal agencies. As legal scholar Peter M. Shane notes in the New York Times, this represents 'a power move over independent agencies, a structure of administration that Congress has used for various functions going back to the 1880s.' The order requires these agencies to submit regulations for White House review, grants the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) authority to restrict congressionally-appropriated funding, and declares the President and Attorney General as sole interpreters of law for federal employees.

This directive bears a clear resemblance to Germany’s 1933 Enabling Act which provided legal framework for the Nazi regime's consolidation of power.

From Wikipedia:

“The combined effect of the Enabling Act and the Reichstag Fire Decree transformed Hitler's government into a legal dictatorship and laid the groundwork for his totalitarian regime. By July, the NSDAP was the only legally permitted party in Germany. From 1933 onward, the Reichstag effectively became the rubber stamp parliament that Hitler desired.

The German conservative elite, including the vice-chancellor Franz von Papen, miscalculated the true intention of the Nazis to monopolize state power, and were soon marginalized by the Nazi regime. By mid-March, the government began sending communists, trade union leaders, and other political dissidents to Dachau, the first Nazi concentration camp.”

Both measures employ existing legal structures to fundamentally alter governmental function while maintaining a veneer of legitimacy. Both invoke "accountability" while effectively reducing oversight, and both rely on expansive interpretations of executive authority to justify their scope.

The order's approach mirrors the historical exemplar of democratic backsliding in Germany, leading to World War 2, through three key mechanisms:

1. It codifies actions already being taken, similar to Hitler's approach in 1933. The administration has already removed leaders of independent agencies, including the chair of the National Labor Relations Board and the Office of Special Counsel director. This pattern of establishing facts on the ground before formalizing them through legal mechanisms is a common feature of democratic erosion.

2. It systematically undermines institutional independence established by Congress. Independent agencies were specifically designed to operate with partial insulation from political pressure. The order's requirement that these agencies accept White House interpretation of law fundamentally alters this arrangement, concentrating unprecedented power in the executive branch.

3. It creates a framework for resource control through the Office of Management and Budget. By granting OMB authority to restrict funding based on alignment with presidential priorities, the order effectively nullifies congressional appropriation authority over these agencies.

From The Washington Post: "Trump already has more control over the oversight of Wall Street than his immediate predecessors, thanks to recent precedents such as the Supreme Court ruling related to the CFPB director. With that expanded power, Trump can immediately adopt the more industry-friendly approach to regulation that many in his party support, without waiting for the terms of Biden-appointed holdovers to expire."

The involvement of Russell Vought and Project 2025 suggests long-term strategic planning rather than improvisational policymaking. This approach displays the highly coordinated and ongoing effort to fundamentally alter American governance structures, and potentially eliminate democracy itself.

The order deliberately establishes conflict between executive power and congressional authority over independent agencies, which appears designed to force judicial resolution favorable to expanded executive authority, particularly given the current Supreme Court's receptiveness to unitary executive theory.

My analysis suggests several likely outcomes with varying degrees of certainty.

• In the short term (90% confidence), we can expect immediate legal challenges from Congress and affected agencies, market uncertainty in regulated sectors, and increased political polarization over executive authority.

• Medium-term effects (75% confidence) likely include SCOTUS battles over unitary executive theory, weakening of regulatory enforcement capabilities, and exodus of experienced agency personnel. This could lead to reduced agency ability to act independently of White House priorities.

• Long-term implications (60% confidence) suggest potential permanent alteration of federal government structure if the order is upheld, creating precedent for future executives to further consolidate power. This could result in weakened institutional capacity to resist executive overreach and potential constitutional crisis over separation of powers.

The obvious parallels between Hitler’s Enabling Act and Trump’s executive order reveal deeply concerning patterns of democratic erosion through legal mechanisms. Trump’s systematic undermining of independent agencies mirrors historical patterns in which institutional independence was gradually eliminated through seemingly legal means–eventually leading to horrific lasting consequences for hundreds of millions of innocent people.

This situation represents a critical juncture for American democracy, with outcomes likely depending on institutional response capacity and public understanding of the stakes involved.

I am doing my part.