• Evaluate the view that checks and balances in the US Constitution are eff

• Introduction:

ü  Check for ‘limits’. (dates, specific election)

ü  Define ‘effective’. What are checks and balances for? To ensure limited government

ü  Why is this question being asked? The presidency of Donald Trump is testing the effectiveness of the Constitution.In 2026, the effectiveness of the U.S. system of checks and balances is a subject of intense debate, with critics arguing that partisan polarization and executive overreach have severely undermined the constitutional framework 

ü  State a viewpoint.- There are significant challenges to the efectiveness od the constitutional checks and balances but they remain largely efffective.

The perception of the Supreme Court as a partisan body has grown. Critics point to the administration prevailing in 21 out of 25 cases heard by the Supreme Court between January 2025 and early 2026 as evidence that the court may be acting more as a facilitator of executive power than a check upon it. Recent appointments to the Supreme Court, and particularly those made by President Trump, have succeeded in establishing a conservative majority which might be seen as compliant with his wishes, undermining its effectiveness as a check. His successful first-term nominations of Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, and Brett Kavanaugh, along with Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, created a conservative court majority. The Trump v The United States, judgment granted the president a level of immunity which could be seen as unprecedented and allowed the president to act beyond effective judicial checks.

However, the judiciary remains an effective check on unconstitutional actions. The Supreme Court’s power of judicial review acts as an important limit on the executive branch. As recently as December 23, 2025, the Supreme Court handed down a major ruling against the executive, holding that the president lacked authority to federalise a state’s National Guard. Courts have also issued orders to pause federal employee layoffs and reinstate staff during government shutdowns. Where the Supreme Court have allowed the president to proceed, they have issued shadow dockets which retain the possibility of ruling against the president.

While the Supreme Court undeniably have a Conservative majority and is currently inclined to take an expansive view of executive power, they remain a judicial body that acts within the limits of the Constitution and is still capable of acting as an effective check

2

Extreme polarisation and President Trump's domination of the Republican Party in Congress have limited effective oversight, undermined traditional Bipartisanship leading to repeated government shutdowns. Republicans hold 53 seats, allowing them to pass certain high-priority legislation via budget reconciliation, which requires only 51 votes and bypasses the 60-vote filibuster. which was used to pass the big beautiful bill.  In 2025, House Democrats estimated that the executive withheld approximately $410 billion in congressionally approved funds, bypassing the legislative "power of the purse".

Congress continues to utilise its power to block or amend presidential agendas. For example, both houses passed the resolution calling for the release of the Epstein files. Republicans in Congress have also refused repeated calls from Trump for the nuclear option to end the filibuster.  A bipartisan group of lawmakers—including five House Republicans—voted in favour of a War Powers Resolution aimed at limiting the President's unilateral military authority.  This demonstrates that Congress still retains the capacity to be an effective check however, while this is currently limited by the Republican majority It strongly suggests that Congress will re-establish a more effective check on the executive should the Democrats regain control of either or both houses.

3

The use of executive orders has significantly increased as a means to bypass Congress. By early 2026, dozens of executive orders have been used to unilaterally implement policy on tariffs, immigration, and federal hiring. Critics argue this creates an "imperial presidency" that effectively ignores legislative checks.

Despite justified claims of executive expansion, the system retains structural limits on the executive branch such as the 22nd Amendment limiting the presidency to two elected terms and the possibility that executive orders and executive agreements may be reversed by future presidents.

 Notwithstanding the unprecedented use of presidential powers by Trump, Republican partisanship in Congress, and a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, the Constitution retains core democratic processes and legal sovereignty, which remain a significant check on the executive.  So, while the view that checks and balances are no longer effective in rests on the current potential for a "dangerous tipping point" as well as the ongoing dominance of partisanship,  the formal structures remain.