Donald Trump’s war on oversight

JAMES WILSON—the one who signed the Declaration of Independence and took one of the Supreme Court’s first six seats, rather than the Scottish hatmaker who founded The Economist—believed that “the House of Representatives [shall] form the grand inquest of the state. They shall diligently inquire into grievances.” Many years later Woodrow Wilson, then a young scholar of government, wrote that for a legislature “vigilant oversight” is “quite as important as legislation”. Many Supreme Court decisions have affirmed that Congress enjoys vast investigative and oversight powers to check the executive branch.

Partisanship influences how those powers are used. A Democratic Congress investigated Richard Nixon. During the Clinton administration, the Republican-led House issued more than 1,000 subpoenas and held hearings on the Clintons’ Christmas-card list. Presidents have rebuffed requests, but none has done what Donald Trump has: declare “We’re fighting all the subpoenas”, sue to block them and instruct officials to ignore them. He seems to feel that partisanship renders oversight illegitimate. That view is dangerous.