Though the Constitution outlines specific powers for the presidency, the actual influence and scope of the executive branch have expanded significantly over time. This growth in presidential power has come through interpretation, crisis response, public expectations, and institutional developments.
The modern presidency is far more powerful than what the Framers originally envisioned, due in large part to the need for swift executive action in an increasingly complex and interconnected world.
Foundational Ideas and Limits
Federalist No. 70: Strong, Single Executive
In Federalist No. 70, Alexander Hamilton argued that an energetic and unified executive is essential for good government. According to Hamilton:
- A single executive is more decisive, accountable, and secure than a plural one.
- The executive must act with “decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch.”
- Energy in the executive ensures the protection of liberty and effective law enforcement.
⭐ Why it matters: Federalist No. 70 is often cited to justify strong presidential leadership, particularly in times of crisis. It supports the unitary executive theory and is commonly used in AP Gov FRQs and argumentative essays.
The 22nd Amendment: Limiting Executive Tenure
After Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected to four terms, concerns about an overpowered presidency led to the ratification of the Twenty-Second Amendment (1951), limiting presidents to two terms.
This reflects the Constitution’s evolving nature, as the amendment was a direct response to fears of executive overreach and consolidated power.
Formal vs. Informal Expansion of Power
Presidents have gained influence both through formal mechanisms and more flexible, informal tools. While some powers are rooted in the Constitution, others have grown through historical precedent and necessity.
| Type of Power | Examples |
|---|---|
| Formal Powers | Vetoes, commander-in-chief, appointments, State of the Union address |
| Informal Powers | Executive orders, signing statements, executive agreements, bully pulpit |
Presidents increasingly rely on informal powers to bypass partisan gridlock, implement their agendas, or respond to national emergencies.
Illustrative Examples of Expanding Executive Power
The power of the presidency has evolved, often expanding in response to national crises, war, or economic turmoil. Each of the following examples represents how historical context has shaped presidential authority.
Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War
Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, justified by wartime necessity. Although controversial, the act established a precedent for emergency executive powers.
Habeas corpus protects against unlawful detention. Lincoln argued the Constitution permits its suspension during rebellion.
Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal
FDR dramatically expanded the size and scope of the executive branch during the Great Depression through the New Deal. These programs created federal agencies and reshaped the government’s role in the economy.
FDR’s presidency is often viewed as the birth of the modern administrative state.
FDR's 1941 “Four Freedoms” State of the Union Address
In this speech, Roosevelt defined America's role in the world in terms of freedom of speech, religion, freedom from want, and fear. He proposed that the executive branch had a duty to promote these values domestically and internationally.
This address marked a shift toward ideological leadership and international responsibility under the president’s guidance.
Theories of Presidential Power: Competing Views
Over time, different presidents and scholars have interpreted the scope of executive power in various ways. These views reflect the ongoing debate about the balance between constitutional limits and practical governance.
The Stewardship Theory – Theodore Roosevelt
In his autobiography (1913), TR outlined a philosophy where the president is a steward of the people, free to act unless explicitly prohibited by the Constitution.
Roosevelt believed bold action was necessary in modern times and that presidential initiative was vital to national progress.
The Constitutional Theory – William Howard Taft
In contrast, Taft argued in Our Chief Magistrate and His Powers (1916) that the president is limited to the expressly delegated powers in the Constitution.
Taft’s view restricts presidential authority and maintains a strict separation of powers.
| Theory | Advocate | Key Idea |
|---|---|---|
| Stewardship Theory | Theodore Roosevelt | President can act unless explicitly forbidden by the Constitution |
| Constitutional Theory | William H. Taft | President can only act when the Constitution specifically permits it |
Executive Orders and Direct Action
When presidents face resistance in Congress, they may turn to executive orders or administrative action through the bureaucracy to enact their agendas.
Executive Orders
- Legally binding orders directed at federal agencies
- Do not require congressional approval
- Can be overturned by future presidents or blocked by courts
Example: President Truman integrated the military via Executive Order 9981; President Biden used executive orders for climate and health policy.
Administrative Directives
Presidents may also direct the executive bureaucracy to enforce laws in ways that align with their policy preferences, shaping the implementation of legislation.
⭐ AP Exam Tip: When explaining the tension between the president and Congress, cite executive orders as a workaround presidents use when congressional gridlock prevents legislative progress.
Appointments and Senate Confirmation
Presidents appoint individuals to critical government roles, but many appointments require Senate confirmation, acting as a key check on executive power.
Types of Appointments Requiring Confirmation:
| Appointment Type | Requires Senate Confirmation? |
|---|---|
| Cabinet secretaries | Yes |
| Ambassadors | Yes |
| Supreme Court justices | Yes |
| Executive Office of the President | Some positions |
| White House Staff (e.g. Chief of Staff) | No |
Why Confirmation Matters
- Ensures legislative oversight of executive appointments
- Can delay or block controversial nominees
- Allows the Senate to influence judicial ideology for decades through lifetime appointments
⭐ Judicial appointments are the president’s most enduring legacy. Even after leaving office, the decisions of life-tenured judges affect national policy for generations.
Tension with Congress and Policy Conflict
Even though presidents have broad influence, their agenda may clash with Congress, especially when:
- The opposing party controls one or both chambers
- Congress is unwilling to pass key parts of the president’s legislative proposals
- There is political or ideological disagreement over policy priorities
This often leads presidents to:
- Rely more heavily on executive orders
- Reorganize executive agencies to reflect policy goals
- Use the bully pulpit to rally public support and pressure Congress
⭐ When Congress’s policy agenda diverges from the president’s, the result is often increased use of unilateral executive action.
Conclusion
The expansion of presidential power reflects the flexibility of the Constitution, the growing demands of the modern state, and the evolving expectations of American leadership. While the presidency was once a relatively modest office, it has become the central figure in national and international politics.
But this growth has also raised concerns about executive overreach, constitutional limits, and the importance of maintaining checks and balances. Whether through appointments, executive orders, or historical crisis leadership, the presidency continues to adapt—and occasionally challenge—the boundaries of its constitutional authority.
🎥 Watch: AP GOPO - Presidential Roles
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the expansion of presidential power and why does it matter?
Expansion of presidential power means presidents—using formal tools (commander-in-chief, appointments, executive orders, signing statements) and informal ones (bully pulpit, executive privilege, unilateral action)—have stretched how much they can do without Congress. Debates trace back to Federalist No. 70, Teddy/Roosevelt’s stewardship theory, FDR’s wartime expansions, and limits like Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer, the War Powers Resolution, and the Twenty-Second Amendment. Terms you should know: Unitary Executive Theory, Imperial Presidency, and examples like executive orders or signing statements. Why it matters: expansion changes separation of powers, affects checks and balances, and shows up on the exam (explain/justify presidential use of power—LO 2.6.A). For topic review, see the AP study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC). For broader unit review or extra practice, check Unit 2 (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2) and 1,000+ practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
How have presidents justified using more power than the Constitution originally gave them?
Presidents justify using more power than the Framers might’ve expected in a few predictable ways. They point to explicit clauses (like “commander-in-chief”) and to implied or “inherent” powers during crises (national security, emergencies). Philosophically, some invoke Stewardship Theory (Theodore Roosevelt) or the Unitary Executive Theory to argue the president needs broad, independent authority to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” (and protect the nation)—an argument Federalist No. 70 supports for a strong single executive. Practically, presidents use tools like executive orders, executive privilege, signing statements, and wartime actions to act quickly. Courts and Congress push back (see Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer, War Powers Resolution, and the Twenty-Second Amendment as a political check), so presidents frame actions as necessary, urgent, or constitutional to defend them. For AP exam prep, review LO 2.6.A and the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC) and practice related questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
What does Federalist No. 70 say about having one president instead of multiple executives?
Federalist No. 70 argues for a single, energetic executive rather than multiple co-equal executives. Hamilton says unity in the presidency provides “decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch”—qualities needed for protecting the nation, enforcing laws steadily, protecting property, and securing liberty (this is the foundation for the unitary-executive idea in AP). A single president makes it easier to assign responsibility and hold one person accountable to voters, and it avoids the paralysis and conflicting directions that multiple executives could cause. For AP, remember this document when you explain how presidents justify using formal and informal powers (LO 2.6.A) and connect it to debates about an expansive presidency (e.g., “imperial presidency,” Twenty-Second Amendment). For quick review see the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC) and more Unit 2 resources (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2).
Why did they create the Twenty-Second Amendment to limit presidential terms?
They passed the Twenty-Second Amendment (limiting presidents to two elected terms) mainly as a reaction to Franklin D. Roosevelt’s four-term presidency—people worried a long-serving president could concentrate too much power and create an “imperial presidency.” Limiting terms was a formal, constitutional check to preserve separation of powers and prevent expansion of executive authority (EK 2.6.A.2). It reflects debates about whether the presidency should be more limited (Taft) or more expansive (Roosevelt, stewardship theory), and ties into AP keywords like “imperial presidency” and “unitary executive.” For the exam, know the amendment’s purpose (curbing executive power growth) and how it connects to presidents’ use of formal/informal powers (LO 2.6.A). Review Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC), the Unit 2 overview (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2), and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
I'm confused about formal vs informal presidential powers - what's the difference?
Formal powers are those written in the Constitution or statute—things the president can do because the law says so. Examples: commander-in-chief, appointment & removal, veto, pardons, and treaty-making (and limits like the War Powers Resolution). These are tested in LO 2.6.A and tied to EKs like the Commander-in-Chief Clause and appointment/removal power. Informal powers are ways presidents influence policy without explicit constitutional text. Examples: executive orders, executive agreements, signing statements, executive privilege, using the “bully pulpit” to persuade Congress/public, party leadership, and behind-the-scenes bargaining. Presidents often defend informal actions with theories like the Unitary Executive or Stewardship Theory; critics call expansive use the “imperial presidency.” Important cases and limits (e.g., Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer) show courts/congress can constrain informal expansions. For more AP-aligned review, see the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC) and Unit 2 overview (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2). Want practice? Try the 1,000+ practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
How do FDR and Theodore Roosevelt show examples of expanded presidential power?
Teddy Roosevelt and FDR both expanded presidential power, but in different ways. Teddy used the “stewardship theory”—he acted whenever the Constitution didn’t forbid him—to push progressive reforms (trust-busting, conservation) and to shape policy through strong executive leadership and bold use of appointments and the bully pulpit. FDR expanded power even more through New Deal programs and by relying on executive orders, federal agencies, and a broad reading of the commander-in-chief and spending powers to address the Great Depression and WWII; critics called this the “imperial presidency.” Both presidents justified informal powers (persuasion, agenda-setting) and aggressive use of formal powers (appointments, executive orders). For AP exam prep, link these examples to EK 2.6.A.3, stewardship theory, and imperial presidency—use the Topic 2.6 study guide for targeted review (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC). For more practice, try Fiveable’s unit resources (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2) and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
What's the debate between limited presidential power vs expansive presidential power?
The debate is basically about how far the president’s authority should go. “Limited” views (Taft, rule-bound) stress strict reading of Constitution—Congress makes laws, courts check abuses—so presidents should use only enumerated/formal powers. “Expansive” views (T. Roosevelt, FDR, Unitary Executive/Stewardship theories) argue the president needs broad informal powers—executive orders, signing statements, executive privilege, and robust commander-in-chief action—to protect the nation and execute laws (Federalist No. 70 is often cited). Critics call unchecked expansion an “imperial presidency”; supporters point to crises that required decisive action. Key constraints and tests: War Powers Resolution, Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (limits on seizure power), and the Twenty-Second Amendment (term limits). For AP prep, link these concepts to LO 2.6.A and case evidence on the exam; review the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC) and more unit resources (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2). For practice, try the AP practice problems (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
Can someone explain William Howard Taft's view on presidential power in simple terms?
Taft believed the president should have a narrow, legalist view of power: the president can only do what the Constitution or Congress explicitly allows. He rejected Theodore Roosevelt’s “stewardship” idea that presidents can act unless expressly forbidden. Taft argued the chief executive must follow the letter of the law and avoid stretching powers for political goals, to protect separation of powers and prevent an “imperial presidency.” This view shows one side of the LO 2.6.A debate (limited vs. expansive presidential power) and is what Taft lays out in Our Chief Magistrate and His Powers—an optional reading for Topic 2.6 (see the Topic study guide: https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC). For extra practice applying this to exam scenarios, try Fiveable’s practice problems (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
How do I write a DBQ essay about the growth of presidential power over time?
Start with a clear thesis that answers “how and why presidential power grew” (take a line of reasoning: stewardship/imperial vs. limited). Briefly contextualize (Founders’ Federalist No. 70 vs. concerns leading to the 22nd Amendment). Then use the documents: group them into 2–3 analytical categories (e.g., wartime/Commander-in-Chief expansion, administrative/executive orders & appointments, legal limits like Youngstown). For each group: summarize relevant docs, cite specific evidence, and explain how that evidence supports your thesis. Don’t just paraphrase—analyze motives, constitutional claims (unitary executive, stewardship), and consequences (War Powers Resolution, Youngstown). Add 2 pieces of outside evidence (FDR’s wartime actions, Taft vs. Teddy on stewardship, or the 22nd Amendment). Address point of view/sourcing for at least one document and include a short synthesis connecting to a broader trend (e.g., modern debates over executive privilege). Practice this approach using the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC) and try related practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
Why do some people think strong presidential power is good while others think it's dangerous?
Some people see a strong presidency as good because a single, energetic executive can act quickly in crises, protect the nation, enforce laws steadily, and provide clear leadership—exactly the argument in Federalist No. 70 and the basis for unitary-executive or stewardship theories (CED EK 2.6.A.1). Tools like executive orders, commander-in-chief powers, and signing statements let presidents move fast when Congress is slow. Others see it as dangerous because it can become an “imperial presidency”: too much unilateral power risks abuse, weakens checks and balances, and prompted the 22nd Amendment (term limits) and legal limits like Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer and the War Powers Resolution (CED EK 2.6.A.2; keywords). The debate—limited vs. expansive presidential roles—is central to LO 2.6.A and pops up on the exam. For a focused review see the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC). Want practice? Try problems at (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
What are some specific examples of presidents using informal powers to expand their authority?
Presidents expand authority through informal powers—practical examples you should know for LO 2.6.A and the AP exam: - Franklin D. Roosevelt: used the bully pulpit and mass communication (fireside chats) to build public support for New Deal policies, shaping Congress’s agenda (Stewardship Theory, Imperial Presidency). - Theodore Roosevelt: invoked the stewardship theory to justify broad executive actions (trust-busting, conservation) without explicit congressional authorization. - Harry Truman: recognized as using executive agreements and emergency actions (Korean War decisions) to act without formal declarations of war (Commander-in-Chief tensions; War Powers Resolution context). - Richard Nixon: claimed executive privilege and issued signing statements to limit judicial/legislative checks (Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer is a key limiting case). - Modern presidents: rely on executive orders and signing statements to shape policy quickly (unitary executive debates). These tie to CED keywords: Executive Orders, Executive Privilege, Signing Statements, Unitary Executive Theory, Imperial Presidency. For a quick topic review, see the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC). For more practice, use Fiveable’s Unit 2 resources (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2) and practice problems (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
How has the role of president changed from what the Founders originally intended?
The Founders expected a single, energetic executive (Federalist No. 70) with limited, constitutionally enumerated powers—appointments, veto, commander-in-chief—checked by Congress and the courts. Over time presidents expanded power by using informal tools (executive orders, executive privilege, signing statements) and broad interpretations like the Unitary Executive or Stewardship theories (Theodore & Franklin Roosevelt are key examples). Crises—wars, the Great Depression, Cold War—plus growth of the federal bureaucracy and mass media pushed more authority to the White House. Legal and political checks reacted (Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, War Powers Resolution, and the 22nd Amendment limiting terms) but debate continues between “limited” vs. “imperial” presidency views. For the AP exam, focus on LO 2.6.A: how presidents justify formal/informal powers and cases/amendments that constrain them. Review Topic 2.6 on Fiveable (study guide: https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC) and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
What caused presidents to start claiming more power than they used to have?
Mostly three things pushed presidents to claim more power: crises, precedent, and broad interpretations of their role. Big emergencies—wars (WWII, post-9/11), economic collapse (Great Depression)—required fast, centralized action, so presidents used formal powers (commander-in-chief, appointments) and informal tools (executive orders, signing statements, executive privilege) to act quickly. Presidents like Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt also argued for a stronger “stewardship” or unitary executive, setting precedents others followed. The growth of the administrative state and modern tech/media made the president the obvious national decision-maker, raising expectations that the office solve major problems. Courts and Congress sometimes pushed back (Youngstown limits, War Powers Resolution, 22nd Amendment), but debate over a limited vs. expansive presidency continues (LO 2.6.A). For a focused review, see the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC) and more practice at (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
I missed class - can someone explain how modern presidents justify having so much power?
Modern presidents justify big power in two ways: constitutional theory and practical necessity. Theorists cite Federalist No. 70’s argument for a “strong” single executive and the Unitary Executive/Stewardship theories (president can do anything the Constitution doesn’t forbid) to claim broad authority. Practically, presidents point to commander-in-chief powers, emergencies, and the need for quick action (using executive orders, signing statements, executive privilege, appointments/removals) to defend actions. Courts and Congress limit that expansion—e.g., Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer and the War Powers Resolution check unilateral military action, while the Twenty-Second Amendment reflects fear of unchecked power. Debates continue between “limited” versus “imperial” presidency views; understanding those arguments and landmark cases is key for AP free-response and SCOTUS questions. For a focused review, see the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC) and more practice problems (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).
How do contemporary events show the ongoing debate about presidential power limits?
Contemporary events show the debate over presidential power limits in clear, testable ways. Examples: use of executive orders and signing statements (e.g., immigration and environmental policy) raises questions about the Unitary Executive Theory vs. a more limited presidency. Military actions without formal declarations (debates over the War Powers Resolution and recent strikes) revive concerns about the “imperial presidency” and the Commander-in-Chief Clause. Court battles over DACA, the travel ban, and attempts at large-scale rulemaking (and lawsuits over student-loan forgiveness) show judicial checks (Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer is a key precedent). Congress responding with subpoenas, funding limits, or legislation illustrates checks on executive privilege and appointment/removal power. These are exactly the kinds of contemporary examples AP wants you to connect to EKs like Federalist No. 70, Twenty-Second Amendment concerns, and Youngstown. For a focused review, see the Topic 2.6 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/expansion-presidential-power/study-guide/IWyXupww9lRxhdZLamNC) and try practice problems (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).