On January 20th, 2021, Inauguration Day, President Joe Biden signed nine executive orders, successfully outpacing his modern-day predecessors. An executive order is a directive implemented by the President, in order to circumvent the tedious Congressional legislation process. The power to implement executive orders is not explicitly outlined in the Constitution, although it is derived from Article II, Section 3. Section 3 states that Presidents “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” An executive order allows the President to give instructions directly to federal agents. This can be useful, especially when the President and the majority in Congress represent different parties. Importantly, executive orders cannot be used for just any law the President wants to see come to fruition. The executive order must be based on the Constitutional powers of the President or those that were delegated from Congress. If an executive order is based on a President’s powers, it is enforced as if it was a law passed by Congress. With this said, executive orders are not an example of completely unchecked Presidential power. Federal courts have the power to nullify executive orders if they are found to be unconstitutional. Although Congress does not have the power to veto executive orders, the legislative body has the ability to overturn the order.       

Despite the fact that news of executive orders has been in the media recently, this Presidential power has been used since the inception of the United States. George Washington issued the first executive order in June 1789. Leading the nation for eight years, Washington averaged one executive order per year. Every President since George Washington, except William Henry Harrison, has signed executive orders. Since Washington, the use of the President’s executive power has expanded rapidly. The most apparent example of the expansion of executive power is Franklin D Roosevelt’s delivery of executive orders. In fact, during his time in office, FDR signed 3,721 executive orders–the most executed by a single president in American history. FDR serves as an exceptional example as his administration implemented many orders for the New Deal in an attempt to bring the country out of the Great Depression. 

Clearly, Biden is not the first to use executive orders, but would his usage be considered excessive? In order to determine this, it is important to compare his activity with that of his modern-day predecessors. President Barack Obama, who was in office from 2009 until 2017, issued a total of 276 executive orders over his eight-year administration. On average, Obama passed 35 executive orders per year.  From his Inauguration Day to the end of January 2009, Obama signed nine executive orders. Further, President Donald Trump, who held the presidency from 2017 until 2021 passed 220 executive orders, an average of 55 orders per year. Similarly, in 2017, from the inauguration until the end of January, Trump signed seven executive orders. Meanwhile, Biden signed 25 orders in the same time span. Clearly, Biden did not only sign several orders on his first day of office but followed that trajectory for the remainder of January. 

In addition to the number of executive orders passed by Biden and his predecessors, it is important to analyze the type of orders executed in the first January of holding office. Of the 25 executive orders signed by President Biden, 14 of them mentioned the COVID-19 pandemic. This suggests that the majority of his immediate orders were meant to serve as a correction for what Biden believed to be a mishandling of the pandemic by the previous administration. Neither Obama nor Trump inherited a pandemic at the start of their administration so it is logical to assume that this condition emphasized an urgency for using executive orders. 

Regardless of the intention behind his executive orders, one should ponder whether Biden’s use of executive orders is excessive or poses a threat to democracy. On the surface level, it seems as if executive orders themselves do not pose a threat to democracy. In fact, orders can be struck down by the judiciary branch and overridden by the legislative. With this said, if an executive order is unconstitutional, hypothetically, it will not be instantly revoked because it must first be deliberated on in court. Moreover, overturning an executive order via congressional legislation could take months or years to accomplish. Congress is meant to make laws because the members, both in the House and the Senate, are representatives of all citizens of the United States. It could be argued that the President is also a representative of all citizens of the country. However, in reality, the President is one actor who belongs to one party. Thus, presumably, Congress represents the citizens better than one actor, the President. 

Also, the legislation process carried out by Congress is drawn out intentionally in order to make sure that there is a consensus that a bill will be supported by the majority of the country. Rapid action by the President negates this long process which was detailed by the Founding Fathers. Despite good intentions, one could conclude that his use of executive orders is excessive, strictly because of the sheer number of orders issued thus far. Furthermore, using such a large amount of executive orders, so suddenly, may create more polarization in the nation, as citizens may feel that Biden is assuming the role of a unitary actor. Despite the possibility of negative consequences which may occur due to Biden’s excessive use of executive orders, one could also argue that his actions are justified by the urgency of the time. Thus, it is unlikely that Biden’s actions will result in an undemocratic precedent unless they are taken out of context by a future leader. Overall, on principle, it may be beneficial to democracy to keep the executive orders at a minimum, but in Biden’s case, not taking drastic action may prolong the public health and economic crisis that the American people currently face.