News
How constitutional guardrails have always contained presidential ambitions
The article discusses concerns regarding Trump’s second term and potential threats to American democracy, highlighting historical presidential power expansions and emphasizing the resilience of democratic institutions against authoritarianism in the U.S.
Victor Menaldo, University of Washington
As Donald Trump’s second inauguration fast approaches, concerns he threatens American democracy are rising yet again. Some warnings have cited Trump’s authoritarian rhetoric, willingness to undermine or malign institutions meant to constrain any president, and a combative style that strives to stretch executive power as far as possible.
Authoritarianism erodes property rights and the rule of law, so financial markets typically respond with alarm to political unrest. If major investors and corporations really believed the United States was on the brink of dictatorship, there would be large-scale capital flight, equity sell-offs, spikes in U.S. credit default swaps or rising bond yields unexplained by typical macroeconomic factors such as inflation forecasts.
Instead, there have been no systematic signs of such market reactions, nor an investor exodus from American markets. Quite the contrary.
This absence of alarm is not conclusive proof that democracy is safe forever, nor that Trump cannot damage American democracy at all. But it does suggest that credible institutions and investors who literally bet on political outcomes for a living do not view an American autocracy as imminent or even likely.
This is probably because the mechanics of upending American democracy would entail surmounting a thick tangle of constitutional, bureaucratic, legal and political obstacles. As a political economist who has written widely about the constitutional foundations of modern democracies, I submit it’s far more complicated than one man issuing brash executive orders.
Presidents have long seized more power
Throughout American history, presidents have achieved far greater expansions of executive power than Trump did in his first term.
Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War, allowing detention without trial. He bypassed Congress through sweeping executive actions, most notably the Emancipation Proclamation, which declared freedom for enslaved people in Confederate states.
Woodrow Wilson created administrative agencies and imposed draconian censorship during World War I via the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918.
Franklin D. Roosevelt’s court-packing plan failed to pass, but it still cowed the Supreme Court into deference. His New Deal bureaucracy centralized vast powers in the executive branch.
Lyndon B. Johnson obtained the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, transferring major war-making powers from Congress to the presidency. Richard Nixon invoked executive privilege and ordered secret bombings in Cambodia, steps that largely bypassed congressional oversight.
George W. Bush expanded executive prerogatives after 9/11 with warrantless wiretapping and indefinite detention. Barack Obama faced criticism for the dubious legal rationale behind drone strikes targeting U.S. citizens deemed enemy combatants abroad.
These historical examples should not be conflated with an actual ability to impose one-man rule, though. The United States, whatever its imperfections, has a deeply layered system of checks and balances that has repeatedly stymied presidents of both parties when they tried to govern by decree.
Trump’s openly combative style was in many ways less adept at entrenching presidential power than many of his predecessors. During his first term, he broadcast his intentions so transparently that it galvanized numerous institutional forces – judges, bureaucrats, state officials, inspectors general – to resist his attempts. While Trump’s rhetoric was more incendiary, other presidents achieved deeper expansions of the executive branch more discreetly.
Trump’s Jan. 6 plan was never realistic
Trump’s failure to impose his will became particularly evident on Jan. 6, 2021, when claims that an “auto-coup” was afoot never translated into the real-world mechanics that would have kept him in office beyond the end of his term.
Even before the Electoral Count Reform Act made the process clearer in 2022, scholars agreed that under the 12th Amendment the vice president’s role in certifying the election is purely ministerial, giving him no constitutional basis to replace or discard certified electoral votes. Similarly, state laws mandate that certification is a mandatory, ministerial duty, preventing officials from arbitrarily refusing to certify election results.
Had Pence refused to certify the Electoral College vote count, it is more likely than not that courts would have swiftly ordered Congress to proceed. Moreover, the 20th Amendment fixed noon on Jan. 20 as the end of the outgoing president’s term, making it impossible for Trump to remain in power just by creating delay or confusion.
The idea that Pence’s refusal to certify could erase state-certified votes, or coerce Congress into accepting alternate slates, had no firm grounding in law or precedent. After Jan. 20, the outgoing president would simply cease to hold office. Thus, the chain of events needed for an auto-coup to occur in 2021 would have fallen apart under the weight of well-established procedures.
A massive bureaucracy
Potential avenues of power consolidation during Trump’s impending second term are equally narrow. The federal bureaucracy makes it exceedingly difficult for a president to rule by fiat.
The Department of Justice alone comprises roughly 115,000 employees, including over 10,000 attorneys and 13,000 FBI agents, most of them career civil servants protected by the Civil Service Reform Act and whistleblower laws. They have their own professional standards and can challenge or reveal political interference. If an administration tries to remove them en masse, it runs into protracted appeals processes, legal constraints, the need to conduct a bevy of lengthy background checks and a crippling loss of institutional knowledge.
Past episodes, including the George W. Bush administration’s politically motivated dismissals of U.S. attorneys in 2006 and 2007, illustrate that congressional oversight and internal department practices can still produce major pushback, resignations and scandals that thwart political interference with the Justice Department.
Independent regulatory agencies also resist being dominated by the president. Many are designed so that no more than three out of five commissioners can belong to the same political party, ensuring some measure of bipartisan representation. Minority commissioners can deploy a host of procedural tools – delaying votes, demanding comprehensive studies, calling for hearings – that slow down or block controversial proposals. This makes it harder for a single leader to unilaterally impose policy. Those minority commissioners can also alert the media and Congress to questionable moves, inviting investigations or public scrutiny.
In addition, a 2024 Supreme Court ruling shifted the power to interpret federal laws, as passed by Congress, away from executive branch government agencies. Now, federal judges play a more active role in determining what Congress’ words mean. This requires agencies to operate within narrower bounds and to produce stronger evidence to justify their decisions. In practical terms, an administration now has less leeway to stretch statutes for partisan or authoritarian ends without encountering judicial pushback.
Layers of defenses
American democracy has vulnerabilities, and other democracies have collapsed under powerful executives before. But in my view, it’s not reasonable to draw definitive lessons from a tiny number of extreme outliers, such as Hitler in 1933 or the handful of elected leaders who staged more recent auto-coups in fragile or developing democracies such as Argentina, Peru, Turkey and even Hungary.
The United States stands out for having a complex federal system, entrenched legal practices and multiple layers of institutional friction. Those protections have historically proven adept at limiting presidential overreach – whether subtle or bombastic.
In addition, state-level politicians, including attorneys general and governors, have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to challenge federal overreach through litigation and noncooperation.
The military’s professional culture of civilian control and constitutional fidelity, consistently upheld by the courts, provides another safeguard. For instance, in 1952 the Supreme Court ruling in Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer reversed President Harry Truman’s order that the military seize privately owned steel mills to ensure supply during the Korean War.
All those institutional checks are further buttressed by a robust civil society that can mobilize legal challenges, advocacy campaigns and grassroots resistance. Corporations can wield economic influence through public statements, campaign funding decisions and policy stances – as many did in the aftermath of Jan. 6.
Taken together, these overlapping layers of resistance make the path to autocracy far more challenging than many casual observers might assume. These protections also may explain why most Americans are resigned to Trump’s second term: Many may have come to realize that the nation’s democratic experiment is not at stake – and probably never was.
Victor Menaldo, Professor of Political Science, Co-founder of the Political Economy Forum, University of Washington
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Food and Beverage
Millions of Eggs Recalled Over Possible Salmonella Risk: What Consumers Need to Know
A major egg recall is affecting nearly 1.6 million dozen eggs sold under several popular brands. Here’s how to determine if your eggs are included and what steps to take if they are.
News You Can Use This Moment!
Consumers are being urged to check their refrigerators after a major recall involving nearly 1.6 million dozen shell eggs due to the potential presence of Salmonella Enteritidis, a bacterium that can cause serious foodborne illness.
The voluntary recall, announced by Midwest Poultry Services, L.P., affects white shell eggs and brown cage-free eggs produced at two Texas farms and distributed between June 6 and July 3, 2026. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the eggs were sold through grocery stores and foodservice distributors in Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Mississippi, and New Mexico.
What Brands Are Included?
The recalled eggs were sold under several familiar brand names, including:
- Kroger
- Simple Truth
- Brookshire’s
- Country Morning
- Sunups
Not every carton under these brands is affected. Consumers should look for:
- Plant Code: P-1950 or 0840962
- Julian Dates: 157 through 184
- Best By/Sell By Dates: July 20, 2026, through August 17, 2026
Why the Recall Matters
Salmonella can cause symptoms including:
- Diarrhea
- Fever
- Stomach cramps
- Nausea
- Vomiting
Symptoms typically begin 12 to 72 hours after eating contaminated food and usually last four to seven days. While many healthy adults recover without treatment, infections can become severe in young children, older adults, pregnant women, and people with weakened immune systems.
The FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are investigating a multistate outbreak involving 98 confirmed illnesses across 17 states, resulting in 26 hospitalizations. No deaths have been reported. Investigators say the recalled eggs are linked to part of the outbreak, although they do not account for every reported illness.
What Should You Do?
If you have eggs matching the recalled codes:
- Do not eat them.
- Return them to the store for a refund or dispose of them safely.
- Wash your hands thoroughly after handling the carton.
- Clean and sanitize any refrigerator shelves, containers, or kitchen surfaces the eggs may have touched.
If you have already eaten the eggs and develop symptoms of Salmonella infection, contact your healthcare provider, especially if symptoms are severe or persist.
Are Arizona Consumers Affected?
The recalled products were officially distributed in six states, and Arizona is not listed among the primary distribution states. However, because food products can move through wholesalers, travelers, or secondary retailers, Arizona consumers who recently purchased eggs while traveling—or who received eggs from family or friends in affected states—should still check the carton codes.
The Bottom Line
Food recalls are an important part of protecting public health. Taking a few moments to inspect the eggs in your refrigerator could help prevent a serious illness. If your carton matches the recalled plant codes and date range, don’t take the risk—return it or throw it away.
STM Daily News will continue to monitor this developing story and provide updates as additional information becomes available.
Related Resources
- FDA Recalls, Market Withdrawals & Safety Alerts
- FDA Foodborne Illness Outbreak Investigations
- CDC: Salmonella Information
- FoodSafety.gov Consumer Resources
Entertainment
The End of an Era: Six Flags Magic Mountain Says Goodbye to an Original Piece of Park History
Last Updated on July 21, 2026 by Daily News Staff
For millions of Southern Californians, a visit to Six Flags Magic Mountain meant more than just riding roller coasters. It was a rite of passage—a place where families spent summer vacations, teenagers celebrated graduations, and thrill seekers chased ever-faster rides.
Now, one of the last remaining reminders of the park’s opening days is preparing to disappear.
According to KTLA, Los Angeles County has approved demolition permits for the former Laughing Dragon Restaurant, an iconic structure perched atop Samurai Summit that has overlooked Magic Mountain for more than five decades.
Although the building has been vacant since 2008, its demolition marks the end of another chapter in one of California’s most famous amusement parks.
A Restaurant with Deep Roots
When Magic Mountain welcomed its first guests in 1971, the building opened as the elegant Four Winds Steakhouse.
Unlike the quick-service restaurants common in today’s theme parks, Four Winds offered guests a sit-down dining experience high above the park, complete with sweeping views of the surrounding Santa Clarita Valley.
In 1988, after the opening of the park’s suspended roller coaster Ninja, the restaurant was renamed The Laughing Dragon, embracing the area’s Asian-inspired theme.
For years, it became a familiar landmark for guests making the climb to Samurai Summit.
Eventually, changing guest habits and the park’s evolving dining strategy led to the steakhouse’s closure in 2006. The building briefly operated as a Papa John’s Pizza location before closing permanently in 2008.
Since then, it has quietly watched generations of visitors pass by.
More Than an Empty Building
To younger guests, the vacant structure may have seemed like little more than an abandoned restaurant.
To longtime visitors, however, it represented something much larger.
Magic Mountain has transformed dramatically since its opening more than 50 years ago. Wooden roller coasters gave way to towering steel giants. New technology replaced classic attractions. Entire themed areas evolved with each generation.
Yet the former Laughing Dragon remained—a silent reminder of what the park looked like during its earliest years.
For many fans, it was one of those familiar landmarks that helped connect today’s park with its past.
Samurai Summit Continues to Change
The demolition comes during a period of significant change for the Samurai Summit section of the park.
Nearby, Superman: Escape from Krypton closed in 2024 after decades of launching riders nearly 400 feet into the air. Meanwhile, Tatsu continues to dominate the skyline with one of the world’s most celebrated flying roller coasters.
Construction is also underway on Magic Mountain’s newest attraction—a Vekoma Thrill Glider Roller Coaster, expected to debut in 2027. While the park has not announced what will replace the Laughing Dragon site, many enthusiasts believe the area could become part of future expansion plans.
The Challenge of Preserving Theme Park History
Unlike museums or historic landmarks, amusement parks are constantly reinventing themselves.
Older attractions are removed to make room for larger, faster, and more technologically advanced experiences. Restaurants close as guest preferences change. Buildings that once bustled with activity can quickly become obsolete.
From a business standpoint, redevelopment makes sense.
But every demolition also removes another tangible connection to the park’s history.
Many Disney attractions have been preserved through photographs, documentaries, and archives. Regional parks like Magic Mountain often receive far less historical attention, making the loss of original structures even more significant for longtime fans.
Looking Ahead
Magic Mountain has not revealed what, if anything, will replace the Laughing Dragon building.
Whether the site becomes part of a new attraction, additional guest amenities, or another expansion remains to be seen.
What is certain is that another piece of the park’s 1971 identity is about to disappear.
For those who grew up visiting Magic Mountain, it’s another reminder that while roller coasters continue to evolve, nostalgia often rides alongside progress.
Did You Know?
- 🎢 Magic Mountain opened on May 29, 1971.
- 🥩 The building originally housed the Four Winds Steakhouse.
- 🐉 It became The Laughing Dragon after Ninja opened in 1988.
- 🍕 It briefly served as a Papa John’s before closing permanently in 2008.
- 🏗️ The building sat vacant for nearly 18 years before demolition plans were approved.
STM Daily News Perspective
As someone who grew up in Southern California, I know that Magic Mountain wasn’t just another amusement park—it was part of the Southern California experience. While the biggest headlines usually focus on new roller coasters, it’s often the quieter stories, like the loss of a familiar restaurant overlooking the park, that resonate most with longtime visitors. Places like the Laughing Dragon became part of family traditions, first dates, school trips, and summer vacations. Its demolition is a reminder that every park evolves, but each change also closes another chapter of its history.
Join the Conversation
Have you ever eaten at the Four Winds or the Laughing Dragon? Do you have memories of visiting Magic Mountain in the 1970s, ’80s, ’90s, or early 2000s?
Share your favorite Magic Mountain memories in the comments below, and subscribe to the STM Daily News newsletter for more stories celebrating Southern California history, attractions, and the places that shaped our communities.
Related Links
jobs help wanted
Ghost Jobs: The Hidden Hiring Trend Affecting Millions of Job Seekers
Ghost jobs are becoming a growing concern for job seekers. Learn what they are, why companies post them, and how they affect hiring, the economy, and your job search.
Why You Keep Applying—But Never Hear Back
If you’ve ever spent hours tailoring your résumé for a position only to hear nothing in return, you may have encountered what’s known as a ghost job.
A ghost job is a job posting that appears active but isn’t currently being filled. While not every old or inactive listing is intentionally misleading, many remain online long after hiring has paused—or even after the position has already been filled.
The result is growing frustration among job seekers and increasing questions about the accuracy of employment data.
What Exactly Is a Ghost Job?
A ghost job is an advertised position where an employer has little or no immediate intention of hiring someone.
This doesn’t necessarily mean the company is acting maliciously. There are several reasons these listings exist.
Companies may:
- Build a database of future candidates
- Test salary expectations and available talent
- Comply with internal hiring policies
- Maintain the appearance of growth
- Delay removing listings after a hiring freeze or filled position
For applicants, however, the experience is often the same: applications disappear into a black hole.
Why Companies Post Ghost Jobs
Some employers say maintaining job listings helps them prepare for future growth.
Others keep positions open because budgets haven’t been finalized or executive approval hasn’t been granted.
Recruiters may also continue collecting résumés so they’re ready when a position eventually opens.
While these reasons may make business sense, they can create unrealistic expectations for applicants actively searching for work.
The Impact on Job Seekers
Ghost jobs can have real consequences.
Many applicants spend dozens of hours:
- Researching companies
- Customizing résumés
- Writing cover letters
- Completing assessments
- Participating in interviews that never lead anywhere
The emotional toll can be significant.
Repeated silence often leaves qualified workers questioning their experience or abilities when the issue may simply be that the position was never actively available.
How Ghost Jobs Affect the Economy
The effects extend beyond individual applicants.
Employment Data Can Be Misleading
Job openings are often viewed as a sign of economic strength.
If a significant share of posted openings aren’t being actively filled, the labor market may appear stronger than it actually is.
That can influence:
- Business confidence
- Consumer confidence
- Economic forecasts
- Public policy discussions
Productivity Suffers
Job seekers spend valuable time applying for positions that may never result in interviews.
Recruiters also spend time managing applications for jobs that aren’t immediately available.
Those inefficiencies create costs for both workers and employers.
Hiring Becomes Less Efficient
When applicants lose trust in job boards, they’re less likely to apply broadly.
Companies with legitimate openings may receive fewer qualified applicants because candidates become skeptical of online listings.
Are Ghost Jobs Illegal?
Generally, no.
In most cases, employers are legally allowed to advertise positions even if they’re not hiring immediately.
However, critics argue that intentionally leaving inactive jobs online without updating their status reduces transparency and wastes applicants’ time.
Some employment experts have called for greater accountability and clearer labeling of inactive or future hiring opportunities.
How to Spot a Ghost Job
While there’s no foolproof method, these warning signs may indicate a listing isn’t actively being filled:
- The same position has been reposted for months.
- The posting never disappears.
- Employees report hiring freezes.
- The company rarely responds to applicants.
- The job description is vague or unusually generic.
Tips for Job Seekers
Instead of applying blindly:
- Focus on recently posted openings.
- Connect with recruiters or current employees.
- Research whether the company is actually expanding.
- Use networking alongside online applications.
- Follow up professionally when possible.
Quality applications often produce better results than sending hundreds of résumés.
Looking Ahead
Artificial intelligence has made it easier than ever for applicants to submit hundreds of applications—and for employers to post and manage thousands of job listings.
As hiring becomes increasingly automated, transparency may become one of the most valuable qualities in the recruiting process.
For both employers and job seekers, trust remains the foundation of a healthy labor market.
Related Links
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics – Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS)
- U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
- Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)
- Indeed Career Guide
- LinkedIn Talent Blog
- CareerBuilder Advice & Resources
- Monster Career Advice
📰 Enjoying STM Daily News? Join the conversation!
💬 Leave a comment, share your thoughts, and subscribe to our newsletter for the latest stories, updates, and “News You Can Use This Moment!” delivered to your inbox.
Stay connected with STM Daily News!
