Component 3A.3: the formal and informal sources of presidential power, the relationships with Congress and the Supreme Court, the limitations on the president, and the debate over the imperial presidency, with reference to presidents since 1992.

What this dot point is asking

Edexcel wants you to explain the formal sources of presidential power (the constitutional roles of head of state and head of government), the informal sources (the electoral mandate, executive orders, the power of persuasion, national events and EXOP), the relationships with Congress and the Supreme Court, the limitations on the president, and the debate over the imperial presidency, all with reference to presidents since 1992. This is examined through the 12-mark Section A question and the 30-mark Section C essays.

Formal sources of presidential power

The president's formal powers are checked at every turn: appointments and treaties need Senate approval, the veto can be overridden by two-thirds of Congress, and the courts can review presidential action. The office is therefore powerful but constitutionally constrained.

Informal sources of presidential power

These informal sources explain why two presidents with identical formal powers can wield very different real power, depending on personality, mandate, events and skill.

Relationships and limitations

The president's power depends on relationships with the other branches:

• Congress. A president needs Congress to legislate and fund their programme. Divided government (the opposite party controlling a chamber) sharply limits them; unified government helps. The relationship varies across a term and a presidency.
• The Supreme Court. The Court can strike down presidential action (blocking executive orders) and shape the president's agenda; appointments to the Court are a major presidential power with long-lasting effects.

Limitations on presidential power include Congress, the Supreme Court and the Constitution, the election cycle (lame-duck status late in a term), divided government, public opinion and the media. Power also changes over the term, typically declining after the midterms.

The imperial presidency debate

This is the examined evaluation, using presidents since 1992.

The case for an imperial presidency. Presidents expand power through executive orders, signing statements and unilateral military action, especially in foreign policy (the war on terror under George W. Bush; extensive use of executive orders under several presidents). Arthur Schlesinger's "imperial presidency" thesis warns of an executive escaping its checks.

The case for an imperilled or checked presidency. Congress (refusing to fund or confirm), the Supreme Court (striking down overreach), divided government and the election cycle all constrain the president. Some presidencies look imperilled (frustrated by Congress and the courts) rather than imperial.

Examples in context

• Executive orders, the informal tool presidents use to bypass a gridlocked Congress, often challenged in court.
• The war on terror under George W. Bush, the textbook case of expanded foreign-policy power.
• Divided government, which repeatedly frustrates presidents and limits their domestic agenda.
• Neustadt's "power to persuade", the classic account of why presidential skill matters as much as formal power.

Try this

Q1. Examine the limitations on the power of the US president. [12 marks]

• Cue. Congress, the Supreme Court and divided government, each developed with analysis (no judgement required).

Q2. Evaluate the view that presidential power depends more on circumstances than on the office itself. [30 marks]

• What the marker wants. A two-sided AO1 to AO3 essay weighing the role of mandate, events, unified government and persuasion against the fixed constitutional powers, using presidents since 1992 and reaching a judgement.