On June 14, people around the country will come together in support of a core American value: we are a nation with no kings. When the Framers of the Constitution drafted our founding document, they rejected monarchical models of government that placed the head of state above the law; instead, the Framers created a system of checks and balances to prevent absolute power from being concentrated in any one of our three branches of government.

Yet the rule of law and our fundamental constitutional principles are now under threat by a President who acts like he’s above the law. As we draw inspiration from the efforts of Americans across the country who will mobilize later this week, we at the Constitutional Accountability Center are redoubling our efforts to vindicate the same principle in courts nationwide: Our Constitution does not allow Trump to rule over us like a king.

One context in which we’re advancing this principle is litigation challenging President Trump’s efforts to unilaterally dismantle critically important parts of the federal government. The Constitution provides that “[a]ll legislative Powers,” including power over the existence of executive offices, “shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” Thus, Congress has the sole authority to create, restructure, and abolish federal departments and agencies, and when Congress wants to give the President authority to reorganize the executive branch, it does so through legislation. Yet the Trump administration has tried to unilaterally dismantle agencies, even though these agencies can only be dismantled through an act of Congress. CAC filed an amicus brief in the DC Circuit on behalf of current and former Members of Congress explaining that Donald Trump cannot unilaterally dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. CAC has also filed briefs pushing back on Trump’s unlawful attempt to unilaterally dismantle the United States Agency for International Development and to restructure the federal government.

CAC has also filed briefs in other cases defending Congress’s constitutional role against executive overreach. In the Ninth Circuit, CAC filed a brief explaining that Trump cannot unilaterally freeze federal funding for the United States Refugee Admissions Program. Our brief goes through hundreds of years of constitutional history to explain that only Congress can appropriate funding, and the executive branch doesn’t have the discretion to unilaterally freeze funds that Congress has appropriated. The Framers gave Congress control of appropriations and spending to guard against the risk of a tyrannical President. They took pains to deny the President the sweeping powers that the King of England had historically enjoyed, such as the power to spend without Parliament’s approval. By the time of the Constitutional Convention, there was a clear consensus that the legislative branch would have the power of the purse. We’ve filed briefs challenging the President’s attempt to unilaterally freeze funding in a number of other cases as well.

President Trump is also intruding on Congress’s authority by attempting to unlawfully remove the leadership of independent agencies, which Congress created to be independent from the day-to-day whims of partisan politics. While the Trump administration may want to expand executive control in every corner of the government, nothing in the Constitution gives the President that absolute power, as CAC has explained in brief after brief. And that is for the benefit of everyday Americans. If the independence of these agencies is undermined by Trump’s attacks, consumers, workers, and the environment will suffer—while corporate interests will benefit.

The Framers of our Constitution created a divided system of checks and balances meant to prevent a President from accumulating the degree of power associated with tyrants. But the system of checks and balances that has long protected American freedom requires our defense now. CAC will keep fighting in the courts to hold President Trump accountable, because our constitutional system was designed to hold Presidents accountable, and that’s what Trump is—a President, not a King.

• Villarreal v. Texas — In a case the Supreme Court will be hearing this fall, the Court will consider whether a defendant’s constitutional right to assistance of counsel is violated by a court order prohibiting the defendant and his counsel from discussing the defendant’s testimony during a 24-hour recess at a critical stage of his trial. CAC filed an amicus brief in support of Mr. Villarreal, explaining that the trial court’s order is at odds with Supreme Court precedent and undermines the Sixth Amendment’s ability to fulfill its fundamental role as a safeguard of liberty. Supreme Court, brief filed June 10.
• New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support v. Trump— The First Circuit is considering whether President Trump’s executive order purporting to limit birthright citizenship to children who have at least one parent who is a citizen or is lawfully admitted for permanent residence is constitutional. The government has appealed an injunction blocking the order, and CAC filed an amicus brief on behalf of an ideologically diverse group of leading scholars of constitutional law and immigration urging the First Circuit to affirm the lower court’s decision. First Circuit, brief filed June 6.
• CASA v. Trump— In a case raising the same issue as New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support v. Trump, CAC also filed an amicus brief on behalf of the same group of leading scholars of constitutional law and immigration urging the Fourth Circuit to affirm the lower court’s decision to block Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship. Fourth Circuit, brief filed June 6.
• American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. Trump— In early May, a district court issued a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration’s attempts to unilaterally reorganize the federal government. The government moved for an emergency stay in the Ninth Circuit, and CAC filed an amicus brief in opposition to the stay. The appeals court denied the emergency stay application, echoing the history recounted in CAC’s brief and concluding that the President does not possess the authority to unilaterally reorganize the executive branch. The government then asked the Supreme Court to stay the injunction, and CAC filed in opposition to the stay. Ninth Circuit, brief filed May 14, stay denied May 30; Supreme Court, brief filed June 6.
• W.M.M. v. Trump — Trump has invoked the Alien Enemies Act, a wartime statute passed in 1798, as justification for sending hundreds of Venezuelan immigrants to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador without due process. A group of Venezuelan citizens has challenged their threatened removal to the same prison, and CAC filed an amicus brief in the Fifth Circuit that uses the text and history of the Alien Enemies Act to show one of the reasons why Trump’s invocation of the Act is unlawful. Fifth Circuit, brief filed June 2.
• Shilling v. Trump —Plaintiffs are challenging President Trump’s executive order categorically barring transgender people from serving in the military. CAC filed a brief in the Ninth Circuit in support of the plaintiffs. Ninth Circuit, brief filed May 30.
• Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County —The Supreme Court limited the scope of the environmental review required under the National Environmental Policy Act. The majority held that the Surface Transportation Board was not afforded appropriate deference and that it was not required to address the environmental effects of related future projects. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson concurred only in the judgement, deriding the majority for “grounding its analysis largely in matters of policy.” United States Supreme Court, decision rendered May 29.
• Doe v. Trump; New Jersey v. Trump —In a case raising the same question as New Hampshire Indonesian Community Support v. Trump and CASA v. Trump, CAC filed an amicus brief on behalf of leading scholars of constitutional law and immigration urging the First Circuit to affirm the lower court’s decision to block Trump’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship. First Circuit, brief filed May 28.
• Pacito v. Trump —The Ninth Circuit is considering whether the Trump administration’s unilateral decision to dismantle the United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), including by suspending all USRAP funding, violates federal law and the Constitution. After filing in March in opposition to the government’s stay motion, CAC has now filed an amicus brief on the merits of the appeal. We explain that centuries of practice and precedent confirm that the President and his subordinates have no authority to defy the will of Congress by refusing to execute laws requiring the disbursement of federal funding. Ninth Circuit, brief filed May 27.
• Barnes v. Felix —WIN— The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of the mother of a man killed by the police during a traffic stop, rejecting the lower court’s moment-of-threat rule as “improperly narrowing the requisite Fourth Amendment analysis” to the precise moment of the threat leading to an officer’s use of force. Instead, the Court reaffirmed that courts should examine “all of the relevant circumstances” in considering police conduct. Supreme Court, decision rendered May 15.
• Doe 4, et al. v. Musk —A group of civil servants who were dismissed or forced to stop their work at USAID sued Elon Musk on the ground that Musk and DOGE’s actions were unlawful because Musk’s role at DOGE violates the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and separation of powers. CAC filed a brief in support of the workers, explaining why the unilateral executive establishment of an office like Musk’s is not permitted under the Appointments Clause. United States District Court for the District of Maryland, brief filed May 15.
• National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought —The D.C. Circuit is considering whether the Trump administration’s efforts to unilaterally shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau are constitutional. Our amicus brief on behalf of current and former members of Congress explains why the administration’s actions violate the Constitution’s separation of powers. C. Circuit, brief filed May 9.

• June 10: Elizabeth Wydra joined Bloomberg’s Balance of Power to discuss Trump’s deployment of the military to the LA protests. “TV (Bloomberg): Should Trump Have Sent Troops to Los Angeles?”
• May 27: Anna Jessurun was quoted in Univision’s article on the history of the birthright citizenship guarantee. “La ciudadanía por nacimiento NO era solo para los “hijos de los esclavos”: la historia desmiente a Trump”
• May 22: Elizabeth Wydra joined an NPR podcast to talk about the major legal questions surrounding President Trump’s crypto profits. “PODCAST NPR’s The Indicator from Planet Money: How Trump is making coin from $TRUMP coin”
• May 22: The Bibb Voice quoted CAC’s brief in Barnes v. Felix in reviewing the recent Supreme Court decision in the case. “Police Immunity & Alabama’s Back the Blue Act”
• May 19: CAC’s brief was cited in an article from The Atlantic on the recent oral argument at the Supreme Court in the birthright citizenship cases. “Trump Is Tired of Courts Telling Him He’s Breaking the Law”
• May 16: Brianne Gorod’s and Nargis Aslami’s responses to the decision in Barnes v. Felix were quoted in the Windy City Word. “High Court Opens Door to Police Accountability”
• May 15: Courthouse News Service quoted Smita Ghosh’s statement responding to oral argument at the Supreme Court in the birthright citizenship cases. “Supreme Court gripe with nationwide injunctions clipped by birthright citizenship case”
• May 14: Brianne Gorod was quoted in Roll Call ahead of the birthright citizenship oral argument at the Supreme Court. “Supreme Court to hear oral arguments over birthright citizenship”
• May 9: Bloomberg Law published an article on CAC’s brief on behalf of members of Congress in National Treasury Employees Union v. Vought. “Dodd-Frank Authors Join Warren, Waters to Challenge CFPB Firings”

CAC Welcomes Our Summer 2025 Interns!

We are excited to welcome this year’s class of legal interns to CAC! Joining us this summer are Will Cover (Harvard, ’27), Alexander Moreno (University of Chicago, ’26), and Grace Parker (Yale, ’27). Thank you to our interns for helping us in our critical work!

YOUR Support Directly Enables CAC to Fulfill Our Progressive Constitutional Mission

CAC’s work helps defend the rule of law, advance economic justice, promote civil and human rights, and much more. In this critical year, will you support CAC with a gift of $50, $100, $500 or more to fulfill the Constitution’s progressive promise?