ISSUE BRIEF: The Historical and Legal Basis for the Exercise of Congressional Oversight Authority

With the recent change in leadership of the House of Representatives following the 2018 midterm elections, there has been considerable discussion about what role the 116th Congress will play in holding the Trump Administration and others accountable to the text and values of the U.S. Constitution, as well as to federal law more generally.

Summary

The House of Representatives could, if it chooses, play a significant role—investigating a range of critical matters such as the misuse of funds by cabinet officials, connections between President Trump’s campaign and Russia, whether the President or other officials are improperly benefitting financially from their offices, and whether the Executive Branch is properly enforcing environmental and other public health and safety laws.

Congress’s power to investigate has deep roots in our political tradition, and the ability of Congress to investigate is embedded in our national charter, which gives Congress the power to legislate. As the Supreme Court has recognized, “[a] legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect or change; and where the legislative body does not itself possess the requisite information—which not infrequently is true—recourse must be had to others who do possess it.” Given its function, the congressional power to investigate is quite broad, “indeed co-extensive with the power to legislate.” Moreover, should the Executive Branch refuse to comply with congressional requests for information, Congress has tools available to enforce its oversight authority, including bringing a civil action in court against recalcitrant Executive Branch officials.

The House of Representatives of the 116th Congress can do what the previous House declined to do: engage in robust and vigorous oversight of the Executive Branch. Doing so will ensure that Congress and the American people have a more complete picture of what this Administration is doing, the extent to which it is (or is not) faithfully complying with the U.S. Constitution and federal law, and the ways in which Congress could legislate to correct any wrongdoing and to better serve the American people.

More from Rule of Law

Rule of Law
May 13, 2026

Constitutional Watchdog Joins Suit Over Canceled Digital Equity Grants

Broadband Breakfast
CAC's amicus brief in National Digital Inclusion Alliance v. Trump was featured in Broadband Breakfast. Read more in Broadband Breakfast.
Rule of Law
May 13, 2026

Florida gave Trump an illegal gift in presidential library deal, new lawsuit says

Miami Herland
Sistrunk Seeds v. Trump, the lawsuit brought by the Constitutional Accountability Center and the law firm...
Rule of Law
May 13, 2026

Trump’s plan to use his library as a hotel sparks lawsuit

The Washington Post
Sistrunk Seeds v. Trump, the lawsuit brought by the Constitutional Accountability Center and the law firm...
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Rhode Island v. Trump

In Rhode Island v. Trump, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit is considering whether the President can unilaterally dismantle the Minority Business Development Agency, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, and...
Rule of Law
May 13, 2026

CAC Release: New Lawsuit Seeks to Hold President Trump and Governor DeSantis Accountable for Violation of U.S. Constitution’s Domestic Emoluments Clause

WASHINGTON, DC – The Constitutional Accountability Center and Gelber Schachter & Greenberg jointly filed a...
By: Elizabeth B. Wydra, Miriam Becker-Cohen, Gerald Greenberg, Dan Gelber
Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Sistrunk Seeds v. Trump

On behalf of a Miami nonprofit, Miami residents, and a Miami Dade College student, CAC sued to hold President Trump accountable for violating the Domestic Emoluments Clause.