The recent usage of presidential directives by President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump initiated debates around limits of presidential power. Research on the presidential power has shown lack of focus on the presidential directives, misinterpretation and wrong terminology which resulted in false accusations of presidential overreach and abuse of power. This thesis argues that the political gridlock and increasing passivity of Congress have contributed to a shift between the executive and legislative power of government. This thesis will trace the extent to which Congress has become resistant to pass two of the key priorities of President Obama's political agenda - immigration reform and gun regulation, after which the President had to act on the issues unilaterally. The main aim of the thesis is to show that presidential directives of President Obama were not issued in a vacuum and that there were debates, persuasion and negotiations preceding the executive actions in an attempt to advance President's agenda in a form of bipartisan legislation rather than unilateral presidential directive.

No description available.