Kentuckians are threatened by an all-powerful president without checks or balance | Opinion

Unchecked presidential power isn’t just a Washington issue — it threatens the everyday lives of Kentuckians. On Dec. 6, the New York Times Editorial Board published a powerful piece titled “The Supreme Court Is Failing at Its Most Important Job.” The article argued that the Court is neglecting its constitutional duty to act as a check on presidential power. This warning comes at a time when President Trump, in his second term, has pursued sweeping changes to the federal government — moves that lower courts have often blocked as unlawful. Yet the Supreme Court has repeatedly stepped in to lift those blocks, frequently through unsigned emergency rulings with little or no explanation. The editorial pointed to examples where the Court allowed Trump to fire independent regulators without cause, dismantle parts of the Department of Education, and push forward other executive actions before their legality could be tested. These interventions, often made through the so‑called “shadow docket,” bypass the normal process of full hearings and written opinions. The result is a judiciary that appears to be enabling presidential overreach rather than restraining it. This concern is not limited to progressive critics. Justice Neil Gorsuch, a conservative appointed by Trump himself, has voiced alarm about the scale of executive power being asserted. In cases involving Trump’s use of tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, Gorsuch asked bluntly: “What president’s ever going to give that power back?”

His skepticism reflects a deeper worry—that once authority is ceded to the executive, it rarely returns to Congress or the people. Gorsuch’s remarks show that even within the Court’s conservative bloc, there is recognition that democracy cannot survive if one branch accumulates unchecked power. Legal analysts have noted that the 2025–26 Supreme Court term is unusually focused on presidential authority. Cases on the docket include challenges to Trump’s firing of independent agency commissioners, his use of tariffs, and even questions about birthright citizenship. Chief Justice John Roberts has led the Court’s conservative majority in a steady march toward expanding presidential power, with some observers warning that the Court may overturn long‑standing precedents like Humphrey’s Executor (1935), which limited the president’s ability to remove officials at will. The New York Times editorial framed this as a constitutional crisis in the making. If the Court continues to side with the executive branch without explanation, it risks eroding public trust in the judiciary. Federal judges are not elected; their authority rests entirely on legitimacy and transparency. When rulings are issued in the dark, families across America are left vulnerable to decisions made without accountability. For communities like Lexington, Catlettsburg, and the farthest reaches of Kentucky, this isn’t just about abstract legal theory. National decisions ripple into local life. The strength of our schools, the fairness of our workplaces, and the security of our retirements all depend on institutions that uphold the rule of law. If the Supreme Court abdicates its responsibility, ordinary families bear the consequences. Justice Elena Kagan, one of the Court’s liberal voices, has also warned that the conservative majority seems “raring” to dismantle limits on presidential authority. Her concern echoes Gorsuch’s: once power shifts decisively to the executive, it is unlikely to return. This bipartisan unease underscores the gravity of the moment. The broader implications are clear. If the Court allows presidents to fire regulators at will, dismantle agencies, or impose sweeping tariffs without congressional oversight, then the balance of powers envisioned by the Constitution collapses. The judiciary was designed to be the backstop — the guardian of limits. Without it, the presidency risks becoming something closer to a monarchy. For families across Kentucky — from the Bluegrass to the coalfields — the danger is practical as well as philosophical. A president unchecked by the courts could reshape education policy, labor protections, environmental safeguards, and healthcare regulations overnight. Communities that depend on these protections would be left exposed. The editorial board’s warning is that the Court’s failure is not just about Trump; it is about the precedent being set for all future presidents. The editorial concluded that the Supreme Court is failing at its most important job: protecting the constitutional order. For those of us who care deeply about the future of our families and communities, the message is clear. We cannot afford complacency. We must demand accountability, transparency, and a judiciary that honors its duty.

Alvin E. Blanton is a retired Steelworker from Armco Steel in Ashland, KY and lifelong USW Union Leader living in Catlettsburg.