Dick Cheney, the former vice president, significantly broadened the scope of presidential authority in the wake of the September 11th attacks. Now, decades later, Donald Trump is leveraging the very mechanisms Cheney established to pursue his own policy objectives – despite their contrasting views on the Republican Party’s future.
Cheney’s extensive tenure in US government, dating back to Richard Nixon’s administration, shaped his theories on executive power through years spent in Congress and various Republican administrations.
As Vice President under George W. Bush, he seized upon the Al-Qaeda attacks – a pivotal moment of national unity akin to Pearl Harbor – to redefine the foundations of executive authority.
“Cheney freed Bush to fight the ‘war on terror’ as he saw fit, driven by a shared belief that the government had to shake off old habits of self-restraint,” Barton Gellman, former Washington Post reporter, wrote in “Angler,” his 2008 book about Cheney’s vice presidency.
Donald Trump has now inherited these expanded powers, deploying them in pursuit of his political agenda. This agenda, while sometimes at odds with Cheney’s former priorities, has stirred controversy in ways reminiscent of Cheney’s tenure.
While Trump invokes “national emergencies” to justify his actions, the sense of crisis and unity that followed 9/11 is notably absent.
Despite his long career concentrating power in the White House, Cheney later cautioned against the threat Trump posed, especially after the 2020 election. In 2024, Cheney publicly supported Democrat Kamala Harris.
“There has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump,” he stated. “As citizens, we each have a duty to put country above partisanship to defend our Constitution.”
Trump, in response, labeled Cheney “the king of endless, nonsensical wars, wasting lives and trillions of dollars.”
The parallels between Cheney and Trump’s expansive use of presidential authority are evident across the American political landscape, from military interventions abroad and the detention of non-citizens to the development and expansion of domestic surveillance capabilities.
“The powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned,” Stephen Miller, a long-time Trump advisor, stated in a 2017 television interview – a sentiment Cheney himself might have expressed during his time in power.
While Trump has distanced himself from Cheney’s interventionist foreign policy and the Iraq War, he has, like Cheney, shown a willingness to deploy military force abroad in ways that often circumvent oversight.
He launched bombing strikes on Iran in June, citing a growing nuclear threat, echoing the rationale Cheney used to justify the 2003 Iraq War.
Recently, the Trump administration designated narcotics traffickers as “enemy combatants” and is undertaking an ongoing campaign to destroy suspected drug-running boats in international waters, claiming these military actions are necessary to protect American national security.
According to the Washington Post, Trump’s Justice Department has informed Congress that the White House does not require congressional approval to continue these strikes, despite the War Powers Resolution of 1974.
Critics previously accused Cheney’s Bush administration of stretching the boundaries of the 2001 Authorization of Military Force to justify military operations against suspected terrorists worldwide. Now, Trump is using similar tactics – drones and missiles – without even the pretense of congressional approval.
Another key aspect of Cheney’s foreign policy was the reliance on “extraordinary renditions” of suspected terrorists captured abroad or on US soil, circumventing US courts.
The Bush administration built a massive facility at Guantanamo Bay to indefinitely detain individuals and made agreements with foreign governments to operate “black sites” where interrogations could be conducted without judicial oversight.
Trump, during his second term, has taken similar steps to avoid judicial review of efforts to detain and deport undocumented migrants on US soil, expanding the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and striking deals with foreign governments to receive deportees.
While some US courts have issued injunctions to halt removals, their ability to review the merits of such actions has been limited.
“The constitution charges the president, not federal district courts, with the conduct of foreign diplomacy and protecting the nation against foreign terrorists, including by effectuating their removal,” Trump’s lawyers argued before the Supreme Court.
Trump has also threatened to use the domestic surveillance and investigatory capabilities of the Justice Department, enhanced by Cheney two decades prior, to combat what he calls “the enemy within.”
While the Bush administration used these powers to infiltrate Muslim communities suspected of harboring extremist views, Trump has called for a national crackdown on the left-wing Antifa movement, which he accuses of violence during demonstrations against his policies.
The government’s surveillance powers have also targeted foreign nationals with legal authorization to enter the US, revoking residency permits and work visas for those deemed to hold anti-American or antisemitic views.
Following Cheney’s death, flags at the White House were lowered to half-staff, a display of national mourning mandated by law. However, this gesture obscures the deep rift between the conservative old guard of Cheney’s era and the Republican Party shaped by Trump.
While tributes to Cheney have been widespread, Trump has remained notably silent.
Trump has frequently criticized Cheney’s interventionist foreign policy and often clashed with Cheney’s daughter, Liz, a vocal critic who served as vice-chair of the congressional panel investigating the January 6th Capitol attack.
Trump and Cheney stood at odds in the years following Cheney’s departure from public office, their disagreements centered on policy and personality. However, regarding the power of the presidency – the scope of executive authority and the necessity for forceful action – they shared a similar perspective.
BBC InDepth is your destination for insightful analysis, offering fresh perspectives, challenging assumptions, and providing in-depth reporting on the most significant issues of the day. You can now subscribe to notifications for immediate alerts when a new InDepth story is published – click here to learn how.
Donald Trump’s use of tariffs in the last nine months was sharply questioned during arguments before the Supreme Court.
It was an encouraging night for the Democratic Party who scored some decisive wins. Here’s what we learned.
Sean Dunn’s attorney acknowledged he threw the sandwich, but argued it was a “harmless gesture”.
Trump’s volatile trade policy has thrown the world economy into chaos, and put some US prices up.
The top US court is hearing arguments on whether Trump’s tariffs are legal, with major implications for presidential power.