Martin Skladany is a law professor at Penn State Dickinson Law.
Former President Trump has been called many things from a would be tyrant to an alleged sexual predator. In the aftermath of the 2022 elections, a new moniker may sound his death knell– a loser. He lost in 2020, as did his party. With inflation running high in a midterm election, he led his party to vastly underperform. Many Republicans are now advocating ditching him but no plan has emerged as to how to do so given Trump has a loyal base in the party.
The first step Republicans should take to distance themselves from Trump is to back the Protecting Our Democracy Act, which outlines roughly a dozen ideas to reduce the ability of future presidents to weaken democratic institutions through the abuse of power. Doing so would provide cover to Republican politicians still hesitant to publicly repudiate Trump because the act supports executive reform that would apply to all future presidents, irrespective of party.
The draft legislation would strengthen the prohibition against emoluments, require disclosure to the F.B.I. of any offers by foreign entities to U.S. political campaigns, fortify whistle-blower protections, limit the president's pardon power in self-dealing circumstances, require tax returns to be disclosed by presidents, and accelerate the enforcement of congressional subpoenas, among other provisions.
The bill already passed the House of Representatives on December 9, 2021. Yet with the upcoming 118th Congress, it will have to be reintroduced in both chambers.
Republicans claim that inconsistent communication by Democrats on why they support PODA lead Republicans to swear off any bipartisan executive reform effort. Some Democrats stated that the Protecting Our Democracy Act was a needed response to Trump's reckless actions in power, similar to the ethics reforms that followed Nixon's tenure. Other Democrats stressed that it couldn't apply to the past but would be forward facing.
Of course, PODA is in response to President Trump, but it is also unequivocally a rejoinder to questionable actions by many past presidents. Former President Clinton pardoned Marc Rich, whose spouse had earlier donated close to a half million dollars to his foundation.
Yet liberal politicians are less threatened by Trump after his growing list of electoral losses. This was apparent even before the midterms when Democrats boosted MAGA Republicans in many primaries, viewing them as weaker opponents than non-election denying Republicans. Many Democrats have moved on from fearing Trump, to potentially privately wanting him to run in 2024 to boost Democratic chances, not just to retain the presidency but also to control Congress. This Democratic shift welcoming Trump because of his unelectability provides an opening for Republicans to no longer stonewall PODA.
It is likely that numerous Republicans are beginning to see the same, or at least speak more freely about what they have understood for some time–that Trump is weighing them down. This Republican shift–desiring to move beyond him for the same reason Democrats want him to run–provides another opportunity for Republicans to help themselves by backing PODA passage.
Even before the midterms, ten Republican Senators agreed to co-sponsor the Electoral Count Reform Act, which like PODA, equally applies to all future presidents. They provided their support for the Electoral Count Reform Act because they understood they could either support the needed reform as an uneventful bureaucratic bill now or potentially have to face down Trump again if he lost the 2024 election but refused to concede.
Getting the Protecting Our Democracy Act through Congress is possible given that many of its provisions were initially championed by Republicans. For example, Republican Senator Mike Lee from Utah previously introduced legislation limiting the emergency powers of the president, which tracks with related PODA provisions that would end many such declarations quickly without Congressional extensions.
Individual parts of the Protecting Our Democracy Act can easily be supported while others discarded. For example, modest provisions already passed on March 11, 2022 by being tucked into the omnibus spending bill. Republicans can use this modular approach to PODA to refuse to back any parts they dislike, yet it is hard to see what Republicans might not like in the act. Do they really not want the ability to better enforce Congressional subpoenas, a provision in PODA, given their desire to question Hunter Biden?
This highlights the fact that by supporting PODA, Republicans can put pressure on Biden. The current administration has provided modest support to executive reform in general but, from the start, opposed numerous draft provisions. Any use of his veto in this area would taint Biden's standing, while his signature on PODA would, appropriately, constrain his scope of action.
Republicans who no longer view Trump as beneficial to their careers understand that a gradual public shift away from Trump is strategic. The Protecting Our Democracy Act is a gift. They are seasoned enough to spin it however they'd like–fealty to the Constitution, which it is, or enabling better oversight of all presidents going forward, which will always be needed. There are few saints and fewer presidents; the chances of overlap are low.
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.