Matter of Opinion · New York Times Opinion

Don’t Be Fooled, ‘Trump Is a Weak President’

February 14, 2025·45 min·4 clips

Jamel Bowie reveals why Trump's inability to persuade Congress exposes his weakness as president.

This episode of Matter of Opinion features hosts Carlos Lozada and Michelle Cottle alongside opinion columnists Jamelle Bouie and David French. They analyze the political and legal turmoil surrounding former President Donald Trump's efforts to expand executive authority. The central question is whether the United States is experiencing a constitutional crisis. David French describes Trump's actions as a "constitutional revolution" with many facets, like a hydra, including moves on birthright citizenship, DEI programs, and immigration. Jamelle Bouie argues the crisis is an attempt to "unbound the presidency from the Constitution," citing the administration's move to freeze congressionally appropriated spending. They discuss how congressional Republicans, like Senator Mike Lee and Speaker Mike Johnson, have largely acquiesced to these executive power grabs despite past stances. French notes a key figure, Russ Vought, has argued for sweeping away centuries of precedent. Bouie contends Trump is "a weak president" who lacks the skill to broker legislative deals, relying instead on executive orders, which he calls the "low point" in the hierarchy of legal force. French warns this creates long-term instability, as future presidents will inherit and could abuse these expanded powers. The conversation examines how gerrymandering and partisan incentives have led Congress to abdicate its constitutional role, prioritizing media visibility over governance. Bouie connects this to a systemic flaw, arguing the Constitution wasn't designed for the primacy of modern political parties. A surprising claim is that major constitutional changes in U.S. history, like Reconstruction, were often partisan projects rather than bipartisan consensus. French proposes specific reforms, like expanding the House of Representatives to dilute gerrymandering and amending the Constitution to modify the presidential pardon power. Bouie suggests explicitly stating a president can be criminally liable for official acts, repudiating the Supreme Court's *Trump v. United States* immunity ruling. The hosts note the irony that meaningful constitutional reform is most needed when political polarization makes it hardest to achieve. The tone is a conversational, analytical roundtable among informed columnists, blending historical references with current political analysis. It is educational but urgent, dissecting complex governmental structures with a sense of concern. Listeners interested in American political institutions, separation of powers, and the practical workings of constitutional government will find this episode compelling. Those seeking light entertainment or partisan rallying cries may find it too dense and procedural.

As heard by us

A careful argument about Trump, court power, and what presidential limits still mean.

Matter of Opinion takes a familiar Trump headline and uses it to ask a harder question: how much presidential restraint still matters when the system keeps moving anyway.

Read the full review in PlayNext →

Why you'd press play

You want a measured argument about whether constitutional limits still hold under Trump-era power.

Read the full recommendation in PlayNext →

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from Matter of Opinion