Between Two Fires: The Institutional and Public Constraints to Unilateral Policy Change

Abstract

Though the US presidency literature widely examines how Congress limits executive power, recent discourse argues the public is the more effective restraint. This paper develops a theory explaining when inter-institutional relations and public constraints influence the alteration of unilateral directives. Both are important for curbing substantial policy changes that likely provoke congressional and public response. Using data on when executive orders are amended and revoked between 1955 and 2013 to measure policy shifts, I find orders are less likely to be altered under presidents facing oppositional or cohesive congresses and high public disapproval. Both types of constraints are strongest for large policy changes, that is, revocations or targeting ideologically distant orders. This study advances the unilateralism literature by examining interactions between multiple constraints and degrees of policy change, while also contributing to studies of policy duration.