Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Holding Trump Accountable: He’s NOT the Emperor

Opinion

Holding Trump Accountable: He’s NOT the Emperor
shallow focus photography white crown hanging decor
Photo by Megan Watson on Unsplash

Publishers' Notes: Our challenge as a publication, dedicated to keeping our readers informed so we can repair our democracy and make it live and work in our everyday lives, is not to be overly reactive or partisan. At the same time, we must not ignore the dangers of the administration's degrading, hostile, and accusatory language and actions when they occur. We invite you to read this column outlining our editorial position covering the Trump administration by clicking HERE.

Not every column represents the editorial focus of the Fulcrum. However, consistent with our mission, the column below represents a commitment to sharing many perspectives to widen our readers' viewpoints.


“But he hasn’t got anything on!” said a little child. “The emperor has no clothes!”

In Hans Christian Andersen’s 1837 fairy tale, “The Emperor’s New Clothes” it takes an innocent child to declare what all those surrounding the emperor will not. That is the “magical” garments,” which only the brilliant and astute purportedly can see, do not exist. They are mere fabrications. But for fear of crossing the mighty ruler and being thought inept or stupid, the courtiers proclaim the beauty of the emperor’s non-existent clothing.

If we take the emperor’s “clothes” to mean the dignity and true power of the office of the Presidency, then indeed, Donald Trump is wearing no clothes. And his chief tailor, Elon Musk, has never sewn a stitch of diplomacy or practiced relational tactics in his life.

In the United States, we do not have an emperor, and despite the publication from the White House declaring otherwise, we do not have a king. We have a president, the head of the Executive branch, whose job is to execute the law. We have two other equally powerful branches: the Legislative and the Judicial, whose jobs are, respectively, to make the laws and to judge the laws. Our forefathers intended for each branch to provide checks on the others, which is critical for the balance of power within the government.

Now, all three branches are peppered heavily with Republicans. In the true sense of Lincoln’s Republican Party, this would not be a problem. But this is no longer the Republican party. A perfect example is how the Republican members of Congress, the party that enthusiastically voted for military aid and support to Ukraine, have changed their tune almost unanimously now in support of Trump's clash with Ukraine president VolodymyrZelensky on the 28th of February.

However, it is the job of all members of Congress, regardless of which party, to speak up when legal or moral rules are violated.

Our country is a tangible collection of many ideas and ideologies, yet all are subject to its laws, and all citizens within the realm possess guaranteed rights. Even those who argue we need a thorough cleansing of the federal bureaucracy are not advocates of “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” Sure, we have very real problems: unchecked immigration, out-of-control national debt, etc. We do, of course, need to solve these problems.

However, the answers cannot be found in alienating half of our country’s citizens and many allies worldwide. President Trump’s meeting with President Zelensky at the White House was a national embarrassment, playing out on an international stage.

How can any of us remain nonplussed when viewing the chaos of the last several weeks? Or have Donald Trump’s litany of executive orders been so stunning that we are stunned and senseless?

Apparently so. Although some are rising in protest, and some judges and districts are bringing lawsuits, most Americans are acting as if all they need to do is change the channel on their smart TV, and this all-too-real reality show will go away.

But many don’t want to change the channel and believe our 47th President exhibits the “strong leadership” our nation needs. Of course, we do want strong leadership, but it must be tempered with respect and compassion, remembering that as president, our leader speaks for all his constituents, and he is the voice the world hears.

Our 26th President, Teddy Roosevelt, said it plainly, “Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far.” Roosevelt’s approach emphasized the importance of maintaining a strong military as a deterrent while prioritizing diplomacy. One example of many was Roosevelt sending a fleet of U.S. Navy ships on a world tour to demonstrate American naval power, a peaceful yet powerful display of strength, aligning with his philosophy of speaking softly while carrying a big stick.

Perhaps many Americans who don’t support Trump's actions remain silent because they believe that, ultimately, the pendulum will swing, as it has in the past, and that we’ll restore sense and balance. But might it not be too late for us and the world if we do not take action now?

Presently, there are 96 legal challenges to the various Executive orders issued by the Trump Administration. Following the rule of law is one way to act with legal challenges and is likely to overturn many of Trump's executive orders. But there is more you can do. Protests against the DOGE cuts are happening across the country at an ever-increasing rate. A “50501 Movement’ standing for “50 states, 50 protests, one day” has emerged in which dozens of demonstrations across the U.S. were recently held.

The overriding message is “No Kings,” where protesters are criticizing some of President Donald Trump’s actions as illegal and beyond the scope of his presidential powers. Additionally, more and more protestors are taking aim at billionaire Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency-led efforts to cut spending and fire employees across the federal government without due process.

Donald Trump was re-elected as President of the United States to serve, not to reign, and he should return to these core principles.

Amy Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."


Read More

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional
beige concrete building under blue sky during daytime

Open Letter to Justice Roberts: Partisan Gerrymandering Is Unconstitutional

The Supreme Court, in holding that partisan gerrymandering is permissible—unless it "goes too far"—stated that the argument made against this practice based on the Court's "one person, one vote" doctrine didn't work because the cases that developed that doctrine were about ensuring that each vote had an equal weight. The Court reasoned that after redistricting, each vote still has equal weight.

I would respectfully disagree. After admittedly partisan redistricting, each vote does not have an equal weight. The purpose of partisan gerrymandering is typically to create a "safe" seat—to group citizens so that the dominant political party has a clear majority of the voters. It's the transformation of a contested seat or even a seat safe for the other party into a safe seat for the party doing the redistricting.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Puncher’s Illusion: Winning the First Round and Losing the War
Toy soldiers in a battle formation
Photo by Saifee Art on Unsplash

The Puncher’s Illusion: Winning the First Round and Losing the War

In the Rumble in the Jungle, George Foreman came in expecting to end the fight early.

At first, it looked that way. He was stronger, faster, and landing clean punches. I watched the 1974 championship on simulcast fifty-two years ago and remember how dominant he was in the opening rounds.

Keep ReadingShow less
Calling Wealthy Benefactors!
A rusty house figure stands over a city.
Photo by Katja Ano on Unsplash

Calling Wealthy Benefactors!

My housing has been conditional on circumstances beyond my control, and the time is up; the owner is selling.

Securing affordable housing is a stressor for much of the working class. According to recent data, nearly 50% of renters are cost-burdened, meaning they spend over 30% of their take-home income on housing costs. Rental prices in California are especially high, 35% higher than the national average. Renting is routinely insecure. The lords of land need to renovate, their kids need to move in. They need to sell.

Keep ReadingShow less
An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed upon entering the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building on June 6, 2023 in New York City. New York City has provided sanctuary to over 46,000 asylum seekers since 2013, when the city passed a law prohibiting city agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement agencies unless there is a warrant for the person's arrest.(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)
An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed.
(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

The Power of the Purse and Executive Discretion: ICE Expansion Under the Trump Administration

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Core Constitutional Debate: Expanded ICE enforcement under the Trump Administration raises a core constitutional question: Does Article II executive power override Article I’s congressional power of the purse?
  • Executive Justification: The primary constitutional justification for expanded ICE enforcement is The Unitary Executive Theory.
  • Separation of Powers: Critics argue that the Unitary Executive Theory undermines Congress’s power of the purse.
  • Moral Conflict: Expanded ICE enforcement has sparked a moral debate, as concerns over due process and civil liberties clash with claims of increased public safety and national security.

Where is ICE Funding Coming From?

Since the beginning of the current Trump Administration, immigration enforcement has undergone transformative change and become one of the most contested issues in the federal government. On his first day in office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14159, which directs executive agencies to implement stricter immigration enforcement practices. In order to implement these practices, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a budget reconciliation package that paired state and local tax cuts with immigration funding. This allocated $170.7 billion in immigration-related funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spend by 2029.

Keep ReadingShow less