The Silent Expansion: How Unchecked Executive Power Threatens Constitutional Democracy

The Facts: A Military Campaign Without Clear Authority

This week, top administration officials including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth faced a bipartisan congressional briefing that revealed alarming developments in U.S. military policy. The administration has been conducting an expanding military campaign against suspected drug trafficking operations in the Caribbean and Pacific, but lawmakers from both parties emerged deeply concerned about the operation’s legal basis, scope, and ultimate objectives.

The briefing occurred on the eve of a crucial Senate vote on a measure that would curtail the president’s ability to take direct military action against Venezuela. What became clear during the session was that this military offensive has been escalating for months without proper congressional authorization or even meaningful consultation. The administration recently shared a classified memo outlining their legal justification, but Democrats uniformly described it as “thin” and setting a “dangerous precedent.”

Representative Gregory W. Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, stated unequivocally after the closed-door meeting: “There’s nothing that was said that changed my mind that they are making illegal strikes.” This sentiment was echoed across party lines, with lawmakers expressing frustration about the lack of “granularity” in the briefing and the absence of a “strike-by-strike” breakdown that would typically accompany such military operations.

The Context: Escalating Operations and Contradictory Messaging

The military campaign has already resulted in significant consequences, with at least 67 people killed in strikes at sea, including another strike conducted just this Tuesday. Administration officials claim the targeted boats were ferrying cocaine, and President Trump has asserted—without providing evidence—that these operations have eliminated stores of both cocaine and fentanyl, thereby saving “thousands of American lives.”

However, the administration’s messaging has been contradictory and concerning. While Rubio and Hegseth attempted to reassure lawmakers that the strikes were not a prelude to regime change in Venezuela, President Trump has simultaneously suggested that the attacks would expand to land operations. The recent deployment of the U.S.S. Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group to the Caribbean—bringing approximately 5,000 additional troops and the world’s most advanced warship to the region—suggests a significant military escalation rather than a limited counter-narcotics operation.

Lawmakers expressed particular concern about the administration’s vagueness regarding Venezuela. Senator Chris Coons of Delaware noted that the fundamental question “Is there something imminent?” remained unanswered. Representative Adam Smith of Washington captured the collective frustration: “Members of Congress are simply left in the dark as to exactly what it is you’re trying to do.”

The Constitutional Crisis: Erosion of Checks and Balances

What we are witnessing is not merely a policy disagreement but a fundamental challenge to our constitutional order. The framers of our Constitution deliberately divided war powers between the executive and legislative branches for precisely this reason: to prevent any single individual from having the unilateral authority to commit the nation to military conflict. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution clearly grants Congress the power to declare war, while the War Powers Resolution of 1973 established specific procedures for presidential military actions.

The administration’s actions represent a dangerous departure from this constitutional framework. When military operations can be conducted for months without clear legal justification presented to Congress, when lawmakers cannot obtain basic information about the scope and objectives of missions involving American troops, and when the executive branch can deploy significant military assets without meaningful congressional consultation, we have entered constitutional crisis territory.

Senator Mark Warner of Virginia raised the crucial question: “Even if at some point there was authority, how long does this last?” This gets to the heart of the matter—the erosion of democratic norms happens gradually, through incremental expansions of power that individually might seem justifiable but collectively represent a fundamental transformation of our system of government.

The Slippery Slope: From Counter-Narcotics to Regime Change

The most alarming aspect of this situation is the ambiguity surrounding the administration’s ultimate objectives. While officials claim the operations are limited to counter-narcotics efforts, the deployment of a carrier strike group and discussion of potential land attacks suggests a much broader agenda. The question posed by Representative Smith—“Is it regime change?”—cannot be dismissed as partisan speculation when the administration refuses to provide clear answers.

This ambiguity creates a dangerous precedent where any administration could justify military escalation under vague pretenses. The war on drugs, while an important national priority, cannot become a blank check for military intervention without congressional oversight. If we accept that the executive branch can conduct prolonged military operations based on thin legal justifications that it refuses to fully share with Congress, we have effectively nullified the war powers clause of our Constitution.

The Bipartisan Concern: A Rare Moment of Constitutional Clarity

What makes this situation particularly significant is the bipartisan nature of the concern. While Republicans exiting the briefing expressed confidence in the administration’s actions—Senator Jim Risch stated “They’re doing good work… They’re doing it lawfully, and I encourage them to keep it up”—the overwhelming consensus among lawmakers who spoke publicly reflected deep unease about the constitutional implications.

This bipartisan concern should alarm every American, regardless of political affiliation. When constitutional scholars and political observers warn about the erosion of democratic norms, this is exactly what they mean: the gradual accumulation of executive power at the expense of congressional authority and public accountability. The fact that this is happening with relatively little public debate makes it even more dangerous.

The Path Forward: Restoring Constitutional Balance

The solution to this crisis lies not in partisan point-scoring but in a recommitment to our constitutional principles. Congress must assert its proper role in war-making decisions, demanding full transparency and justification for military operations. The scheduled vote on measures to curtail presidential authority regarding Venezuela represents an important first step, but much more is needed.

First, the administration must provide Congress with complete, unredacted legal justifications for its actions. Second, there should be regular, detailed briefings that allow for meaningful congressional oversight. Third, any expansion of military operations beyond the current scope must require explicit congressional authorization. Finally, we need a public debate about the proper balance between executive flexibility in national security matters and congressional war powers.

Conclusion: Democracy Demands Transparency and Accountability

What makes American democracy exceptional is not the power of any single branch of government but the system of checks and balances that prevents any branch from becoming too powerful. The current situation represents a dangerous imbalance that threatens this delicate equilibrium.

The expansion of military operations without clear legal authority or congressional oversight is not just a policy disagreement—it is a constitutional crisis in the making. The bipartisan concern expressed by lawmakers this week should serve as a wake-up call to all Americans who value our democratic system. We cannot allow the war on drugs or any other national security priority to become a pretext for undermining the constitutional framework that has protected our liberty for over two centuries.

As citizens, we must demand that our representatives in Congress fulfill their constitutional duty to provide meaningful oversight of military operations. We must insist on transparency, accountability, and adherence to the rule of law. The quiet expansion of executive power happening today may seem distant from our daily lives, but the preservation of our democracy depends on our vigilance in moments like these. The founders established a system of separated powers not for the convenience of governance but for the protection of our liberty—and that protection requires our active defense today more than ever.