New York Times reporter sparks backlash for claims on ‘unitary executive theory’ and Trump OMB nominee
The nomination of Russell T. Vought to head the Office of Management and Budget during President-elect Trump’s second term has stirred up controversy, with a New York Times reporter suggesting that Vought promoted a “unitary executive theory.” The article by Alan Rappeport highlighted Vought’s role in shaping Project 2025, which aimed to bolster executive branch power.
The report described Project 2025 as grounded in a version of the unitary executive theory that emphasizes the president’s authority over federal agencies. This characterization sparked backlash from conservatives who disagreed with the Times’ portrayal of the legal theory. National Review editor Charles Cooke argued that the Constitution clearly delineates the powers of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, refuting the idea of unchecked presidential power.
Despite the Times’ subsequent update to describe the branches as “separate but equal,” critics maintained that the article misrepresented the unitary executive theory. Social media users, including Iowa law school professor Andy Grewal, criticized the reporter’s misunderstanding of the legal concept.
The New York Times has not yet responded to requests for comment on the article. The controversy surrounding Vought’s nomination underscores the ongoing debate over the balance of power between branches of government in the United States.
Breanne Deppisch, a politics reporter for Fox News Digital, covers the 2024 election and national news. As the discussion surrounding Vought’s nomination continues, it remains to be seen how his role in Project 2025 will shape the future of the executive branch’s authority.
