LightNews — News, ranked by scholars

Reconstructionist

@unavaleable.bsky.social

It's bad that unorthodox lawmaking is now the orthodox ways of lawmaking because they're the only ways of lawmaking now

September 29, 2025 at 1:22 PM

jamelle

@jamellebouie.net

the funny thing about sending jd vance out to do sensitive diplomatic negotiations is he has literally no experience. like, none whatsoever. he doesn't even have related experience in lawmaking or some executive role.

April 12, 2026 at 2:41 PM

Chatham Harrison dba TRUMP DELENDUS EST

@chathamharrison.bsky.social

The basic impulse of conservative lawmaking isn't domination per se but panic

September 24, 2026 at 6:59 PM

Reconstructionist

@unavaleable.bsky.social

Unorthodox Lawmaking has become The Only Lawmaking

Sharon 🪳🌹 @sharonk.bsky.social · Sep 1

lot of this comes down to how utterly dysfunctional Congress is as a whole

September 1, 2025 at 11:03 PM

Anthony Michael Kreis

@anthonymkreis.bsky.social

I don’t think this is an essential lawmaking function. Very not speech. Much not debate.

Claire Zagorski, PhD, MSc, EMT-P @clairezagorski.bsky.social · Mar 4

[TW: graphic fracture, sound of breaking bone]

Sen Tim Sheehy (R-Montana) badly breaking the arm of a Marine veteran protesting the war Iran.

March 4, 2026 at 11:37 PM

Will Stancil

@whstancil.bsky.social

by freezing all federal grants, trump is fundamentally transforming the relationship between the executive and congress. he is asserting dictatorial authority over federal spending, transforming congress's lawmaking powers into advisory authority. it is a constitutional crisis

January 28, 2025 at 2:53 AM

Andy Craig

@andycraig.bsky.social

It doesn't matter what other powers they nominally have on paper, including lawmaking. A legislature that doesn't control the checkbook is impotent, and an executive who does is a tyrant.

April 5, 2026 at 11:47 AM

Buttadeus

@thewanderingjew.bsky.social

Yeah I mean we had federal lawmaking power but did not have the Court.

September 25, 2026 at 9:01 PM

Noah Rosenblum

@narosenblum.bsky.social

The most basic problem with this op-ed is that it does not understand how government under law works. It masks this ignorance with buzzwords, but the result is incoherence.

For example, it reads “the President owes lawmaking deference to Congress.” But the President participates in lawmaking. (1/6)

Don Moynihan @donmoyn.bsky.social · Nov 20

Here is the text of the op-ed that Musk and Ramaswamy published in the Wall St Journal.
Lots of claims here about legal authority of the President to do big things. Really appreciate some responses that identify problems with these claims (admin law scholars, talking to you especially).

Our nation was founded on the basic idea that the people we elect run the government. That isn’t how America functions today. Most legal edicts aren’t laws enacted by Congress but “rules and regulations” promulgated by unelected bureaucrats—tens of thousands of them each year. Most government enforcement decisions and discretionary expenditures aren’t made by the democratically elected president or even his political appointees but by millions of unelected, unappointed civil servants within government agencies who view themselves as immune from firing thanks to civil-service protections.

This is antidemocratic and antithetical to the Founders’ vision. It imposes massive direct and indirect costs on taxpayers. Thankfully, we have a historic opportunity to solve the problem. On Nov. 5, voters decisively elected Donald Trump with a mandate for sweeping change, and they deserve to get it.

President Trump has asked the two of us to lead a newly formed Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to cut the federal government down to size. The entrenched and ever-growing bureaucracy represents an existential threat to our republic, and politicians have abetted it for too long. That’s why we’re doing things differently. We are entrepreneurs, not politicians. We will serve as outside volunteers, not federal officials or employees. Unlike government commissions or advisory committees, we won’t just write reports or cut ribbons. We’ll cut costs.

We are assisting the Trump transition team to identify and hire a lean team of small-government crusaders, including some of the sharpest technical and legal minds in America. This team will work in the new administration closely with the White House Office of Management and Budget. The two of us will advise DOGE at every step to pursue three major kinds of reform: regulatory rescissions, administrative reductions and cost savings. We will focus particularly on driving change through executive action based on existing legislation rather than by passing new laws. Our North Star for reform will be the U.S. Constitution, with a focus on two critical Supreme Court rulings issued during President Biden’s tenure.

In West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (2022), the justices held that agencies can’t impose regulations dealing with major economic or policy questions unless Congress specifically authorizes them to do so. In Loper Bright v. Raimondo (2024), the court overturned the Chevron doctrine and held that federal courts should no longer defer to federal agencies’ interpretations of the law or their own rulemaking authority. Together, these cases suggest that a plethora of current federal regulations exceed the authority Congress has granted under the law.

DOGE will work with legal experts embedded in government agencies, aided by advanced technology, to apply these rulings to federal regulations enacted by such agencies. DOGE will present this list of regulations to President Trump, who can, by executive action, immediately pause the enforcement of those regulations and initiate the process for review and rescission. This would liberate individuals and businesses from illicit regulations never passed by Congress and stimulate the U.S. economy.

.

A drastic reduction in federal regulations provides sound industrial logic for mass head-count reductions across the federal bureaucracy. DOGE intends to work with embedded appointees in agencies to identify the minimum number of employees required at an agency for it to perform its constitutionally permissible and statutorily mandated functions. The number of federal employees to cut should be at least proportionate to the number of federal regulations that are nullified: Not only are fewer employees required to enforce fewer regulations, but the agency would produce fewer regulations once its scope of authority is properly limited. Employees whose positions are eliminated deserve to be treated with respect, and DOGE’s goal is to help support their transition into the private sector. The president can use existing laws to give them incentives for early retirement and to make voluntary severance payments to facilitate a graceful exit.

Conventional wisdom holds that statutory civil-service protections stop the president or even his political appointees from firing federal workers. The purpose of these protections is to protect employees from political retaliation. But the statute allows for “reductions in force” that don’t target specific employees. The statute further empowers the president to “prescribe rules governing the competitive service.” That power is broad. Previous presidents have used it to amend the civil service rules by executive order, and the Supreme Court has held—in Franklin v. Massachusetts (1992) and Collins v. Yellen (2021) that they weren’t constrained by the Administrative Procedures Act when they did so. With this authority, Mr. Trump can implement any number of “rules governing the competitive service” that would curtail administrative overgrowth, from large-scale firings to relocation of federal agencies out of the Washington area.

Finally, we are focused on delivering cost savings for taxpayers. Skeptics question how much federal spending DOGE can tame through executive action alone. They point to the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, which stops the president from ceasing expenditures authorized by Congress. Mr. Trump has previously suggested this statute is unconstitutional, and we believe the current Supreme Court would likely side with him on this question. But even without relying on that view, DOGE will help end federal overspending by taking aim at the $500 billion plus in annual federal expenditures that are unauthorized by Congress or being used in ways that Congress never intended, from $535 million a year to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and $1.5 billion for grants to international organizations to nearly $300 million to progressive groups like Planned Parenthood.

The federal government’s procurement process is also badly broken. Many federal contracts have gone unexamined for years. Large-scale audits conducted during a temporary suspension of payments would yield significant savings. The Pentagon recently failed its seventh consecutive audit, suggesting that the agency’s leadership has little idea how its annual budget of more than $800 billion is spent. Critics claim that we can’t meaningfully close the federal deficit without taking aim at entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which require Congress to shrink. But this deflects attention from the sheer magnitude of waste, fraud and abuse that nearly all taxpayers wish to end—and that DOGE aims to address by identifying pinpoint executive actions that would result in immediate savings for taxpayers.

November 21, 2024 at 1:41 AM

#TuckFrump

@realtuckfrumper.bsky.social

Lawmaking Moms Hand Mike Johnson a Major L https://twp.ai/4imCWY

Lawmaking Moms Hand Mike Johnson a Major L

Plus: How does acceptance of a third Trump term get massaged into normality?

twp.ai

April 2, 2025 at 2:59 AM

jamelle

@jamellebouie.net

it is incredible to see folks complain that good people don't run for office, that lawmaking is a hobby for the rich, that our state legislators are run by car dealership freaks, and then insist that we shouldn't pay lawmakers any more than we do.

May 8, 2026 at 1:35 AM

jamelle

@jamellebouie.net

the president can negotiate with congress. the president can offer proposals and suggestions. but the only direct control the president has over lawmaking is his ability to veto! once something is signed into law, he is constitutionally obligated to "faithfully execute" it!

June 29, 2026 at 3:07 PM

The Bulwark

@thebulwark.com

Anna Paulina Luna's proposal to allow new parents in Congress to have a colleague vote in their stead for a fixed period of time is an objectively pro-family policy. Mike Johnson doesn't like it. ICYMI @cheetah.bsky.social: www.thebulwark.com/p/lawmaking-...

Lawmaking Moms Hand Mike Johnson a Major L

Plus: How does acceptance of a third Trump term get massaged into normality?

www.thebulwark.com

April 3, 2025 at 2:00 AM

Second Ave. Sagas

@2avesag.as

Pathetic caricature of good lawmaking.

September 8, 2025 at 6:38 PM

Brian Stelter

@brianstelter.bsky.social

Elon Musk's posts suggest that he's learning Lawmaking 101 in real time. There's value in that, but...

December 20, 2024 at 1:38 AM

Second Ave. Sagas

@2avesag.as

Actually enforcing existing laws (Mamdani) vs. reactionary lawmaking that would make many things worse (Menin).

bsky.app/profile/c-so...

Chris Sommerfeldt @c-sommerfeldt.bsky.social · Aug 5

Mayor Zohran Mamdani announces that New York City is issuing cease and desist letters to more than 40 retailers selling illegal e-bikes (generally, vehicles that can go faster than local speed limits allow).

The targeted retailers include Amazon and Best Buy.

August 5, 2026 at 4:13 PM

The Bulwark

@thebulwark.com

"What’s the phrase? 'When you can’t beat ‘em, change the rules to avoid embarrassment'? I think that’s how it goes."

The latest Press Pass from @cheetah.bsky.social: www.thebulwark.com/p/lawmaking-...

Lawmaking Moms Hand Mike Johnson a Major L

Plus: How does acceptance of a third Trump term get massaged into normality?

www.thebulwark.com

April 1, 2025 at 7:45 PM

Jennifer C

@thejenniwren.teamlh.social

🧵1/4

OUTRAGE: TX Republicans have literally barricaded Rep. Nicole Collier inside the chamber. They demand Democrats sign police “permission slips” to exit.

This is not lawmaking—it’s hostage-taking. It’s fascism in plain sight.

📍 Austin: 1100 Congress Ave. TONIGHT 7pm. Rise up.

August 19, 2025 at 1:18 AM

Subscribe to Radio Free America (link in bio)

@kleinman.bsky.social

One of the most mindblowing things about interning in Congress was finding that the Congressional Research Service exists. Improving it would improve lawmaking.

David Dayen @ddayen.bsky.social · 9d

Once upon a time, Congress had its own in-house think tank that would research and suggest remedies for technical problems politicians might not have a handle on. Might be a good resource now, ay? Here's @maxmoranhi.bsky.social on the long-lost Office of Technology Assessment:

What Congress Actually Needs to Do About AI: Staff Up - The American Prospect

In 1995, Newt Gingrich lobotomized Congress’s technical brain trust. It should be rebuilt.

prospect.org

September 18, 2026 at 1:31 PM

John

@johnlk.bsky.social

We didn't have federal lawmaking power, not really.

September 25, 2026 at 9:21 PM

Alcinda

@alcinda54.bsky.social

How about we make it illegal for ANY religion to be involved in lawmaking? 👍🏻

March 23, 2026 at 3:22 AM

RR Edmonds

@rredmondsart.bsky.social

I don’t recall her being elected to a lawmaking body.

January 27, 2026 at 4:02 PM

Social Media Lab

@socialmedialab.ca

Straight to the point: "The Constitution lodges the Nation's lawmaking powers in Congress alone" www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...

February 20, 2026 at 11:42 PM

Jonathan Ladd

@jonathanmladd.com

Either federal law binds the federal government (as the constitution says) or the entire constitutional lawmaking process is merely advisory and the president makes a final decision by fiat. That’s the question.