The Presidents and the Constitution, Vol. One: From the Founding Fathers to the Progressive Era ed. by Ken Gormley (review)

The president maintains a unique place in the American constitutional order. Unlike Congress, the nature and scope of executive powers are not determined by constitutional powers "herein" granted. The scarcity of constitutional text detailing the duties and powers of the president has resulted in strenuous efforts to reconcile ambiguities surrounding the exercise of executive power with a constitutional system containing a written constitution. Moreover, what constitutional text there is does little to clarify or settle the limits of executive power. A prime example of this controversy is the removal power. While Article II establishes the president's ability, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint certain officials, the Constitution is silent on the power to remove these officers. Under what conditions can a president remove an appointed official, and does he need the Senate's advice and consent to do so? How these constitutional controversies get settled is a matter for politics, where presidents are not isolated actors.

The Presidents and the Constitution, edited by Ken Gormley, ambitiously tries to navigate, and detail the uneasy relationship between the president and the Constitution by paying particular attention to historical context and development rather than focusing on a specific topic of presidential power or Supreme Court cases involving executive action. Given the sheer amount of historical material, this first volume covers the first twenty-six presidents, with the promise of a second volume to complete the historical analysis. Given the extensive list of contributors to the volume, great editorial effort was made to capture an "ongoing narrative" that highlights "constitutional issues that confronted the president, helped to shape the president's time in office, or gave birth to a piece of constitutional precedent during the president's tenure" (11).

This broad sweep of presidential history emphasizes the importance of politics for an executive's constitutional authority. The Constitution is not self-enforcing. In the arena of unsettled constitution meaning, the document requires interpretation and application. This creates a political battle over constitutional meaning, as ambitious executives (and their allies) seek constitutional legitimacy and presidential opponents insist on constitutional restraint. More importantly, political actors must acquiesce to these constitutional interpretations for any attempt to enlarge or restrain executive power to be successful. Rightfully so, this volume highlights the complicated relationship between the three branches of government, being "bound together inextricably in this saga" (10). The meaning of the Constitution comes to life by appreciating the historical development of an ever-evolving conflict between the president, Congress, and the Court.

However, not all presidents are created equal, and the political conditions within and between presidencies are often in flux. While presidents come to office with ambition to shape the presidency and constitutional regime, they must also recognize the importance of maintaining political coalitions and function within the accepted constitutional and ideological commitments of a given political regime. The amount of "energy," to use a Hamiltonian term, that can be brought to the executive is closely connected to the strength of existing political values and constitutional attachments. Even if a president wants to enact change, if the other branches of government and the electorate are strongly attached to the status quo, the president's capacity for change is confined within boundaries of these accepted political and constitutional values. However, there is expanded opportunity for the president to shape the political and constitutional landscape if his election coincides with demand for change to the prevailing values and constitutional attachments. This view of executive powers being exercised within the context of larger political change (or lack thereof) lends itself well to a historical analysis of the presidency, and The Presidents and the Constitution explicitly and implicitly brings to light this political interaction between the president, other branches of government, and the electorate.

For example...