By all accounts, President Trump will face significant difficulty in getting his Cabinet appointees confirmed by the narrowly divided Senate, prompting his team to explore two key alternative tactics: using J.D. Vance’s role as president of the Senate to take control of the chamber or invoking Trump’s constitutional authority to adjourn Congress, allowing for recess appointments. The Republican margin in the Senate stands at a slim 52-48, but multiple Republicans—like Senators Romney and Collins—have already indicated they will oppose at least two of Trump’s appointees, Matt Gaetz for attorney general and Pete Hegseth for secretary of defense. These senators are actively ignoring the mandate given to Trump by the American people, putting their own interests and disdain for Trump above the clear choice of the electorate.
Trump has every right to choose his own team based on the mandate he received from voters. To overcome the opposition from within his own party, his team is exploring two key alternatives to ensure his Cabinet members can take office: using J.D. Vance’s role as President of the Senate to take control of the chamber or invoking his constitutional authority to adjourn Congress, which would allow for recess appointments.
The First Idea: J.D. Vance as President of the Senate
The first idea involves J.D. Vance, acting as president of the Senate, taking unprecedented control over Senate procedures. This concept, supported by conservative figures like Glenn Beck, draws inspiration from Thomas Jefferson’s historical influence over the Senate during his time as vice president. Jefferson helped establish many of the procedural norms still in use today, and the hope among some Trump supporters is that Vance could take similar control to push Trump’s agenda forward.
While this idea is certainly bold and appealing, the reality is that Jefferson’s influence also created many of the rules that make such a move by Vance nearly impossible today. The Senate’s current rules prevent the president of the Senate from wielding that level of control without changing the rules—a move that would require a minimum of 51 votes. Given that Trump cannot rely on 51 votes even to confirm his appointees, expecting the Senate to change its rules to allow J.D. Vance to seize control is unrealistic.
Furthermore, even if Vance were to attempt to refuse recognition of the current majority leader and instead recognize a senator more favorable to Trump, any ruling by the presiding officer can be appealed and overturned by a majority vote in the Senate. Senators can formally appeal the presiding officer’s ruling, and any decision made by the vice president can be challenged. This appeal is then put to a majority vote, effectively overriding the vice president if the majority agrees. A concerted effort to appeal every controversial ruling would create a procedural hurdle for Vance, making it difficult to bypass the majority leader without facing substantial backlash.
Additionally, the Senate could adopt a formal rule stipulating that the majority leader or their designee must be recognized first. While this tradition is currently unwritten, it could be codified into a formal rule, making it enforceable. Rule changes only require a simple majority, meaning that if the majority leader has enough support, this change could significantly curtail the vice president’s flexibility in recognizing senators.
Moreover, senators opposed to Vance’s tactics could use filibusters, holds, or other delay tactics to prevent legislative actions seen as bypassing Senate norms. While these tactics might not directly limit Vance’s actions, they could effectively stall proceedings until traditional recognition practices are restored or an agreement is reached.
The idea of Vance taking control sounds great in theory, but in practice, it is fraught with procedural obstacles such as appeals to the full Senate, potential rule changes and the use of filibusters or delay tactics, all of which would likely make it unworkable.
The Second Idea: Adjournment of Congress
The second idea, however, has a far better chance of succeeding. Under Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, Trump has the authority to adjourn Congress if the House and Senate cannot agree on a time of adjournment. This power has never been used before, making this strategy unprecedented. Nonetheless, Trump, ever willing to break new ground, has hinted that he may be prepared to invoke it.
During one of Trump’s rallies, he made a cryptic reference to a “secret” he shares with Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, which may well involve orchestrating an adjournment of Congress. Here’s how it could work: Speaker Johnson would formally request adjournment on behalf of the House, and the Senate, under the leadership of Majority Leader John Thune, would refuse the request. This disagreement would enable Trump to invoke his constitutional power to adjourn both chambers.
Once Congress is adjourned, Trump could use his recess appointment powers to install Gaetz, Hegseth and other appointees, completely bypassing the Senate confirmation process. The beauty of this move is that it only requires cooperation from Speaker Johnson circumventing the obstruction from the so-called “RINOs” within the Senate GOP.
Trump has a clear mandate from the American people to govern and implement his vision, and he has every right to install the team of his choosing. The entrenched opposition within both parties is merely an attempt by the Uniparty establishment to keep their grip on power. Senate Republicans must rally behind their leader and honor the will of the voters, rather than obstructing Trump’s efforts to fulfill his promises. Should they fail to support him, Trump is fully justified in using every constitutional tool available to overcome these barriers, including recess appointments, adjournment of Congress or procedural maneuvers through J.D. Vance.
Ronald Reagan once wisely noted, “The person who agrees with you 80% of the time is a friend and an ally, not a 20% traitor.” Senate Republicans should take this to heart, especially now. Trump’s vision aligns with the core values of the party, and their opposition only serves to empower the far-left agenda. Instead of focusing on minor disagreements, Senate Republicans must recognize the bigger picture—supporting Trump means advancing the conservative principles that the American people voted for. Unity at this crucial juncture is essential to push back against those who would undermine the president’s mandate. Whatever minor differences they may have with Trump, those differences pale compared to the ideological divide that separates them from the radical left agenda of the modern Democratic Party. Now is the time for loyalty, bold action and unity. By supporting Trump, Senate Republicans can make the more drastic measures unnecessary—measures that, though constitutional, would push the boundaries of modern governance.
The Senate now holds the fate of the Republic in its hands. Will they honor the mandate given to Trump by the American people, or will they force the President to take unprecedented action to ensure his team can move forward with the agenda America voted for?
Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.
READ NEXT: Trump’s New Constitutional Mission Could Spark Nationwide Debate
Take whatever road leads the way for you to have the cabinet you want. Feck those who would stand in the way. recess appointments in probably the least confrontational way to achieve your goals. The Romneys, Collins, Murkowskis be damned. If they won’t listen to reason, go around them. You have a certain 2 year window to rectify many years of sloth and focused indifference, Make it happen as only you can.
(1) Let’s get real. A mandate is the authorization of the electorate for the winner of the election to take certain actions. Simply getting more votes than the opponent is not a mandate. Using 2020 figures, there are 240,000,000 registered voters in the USA. Donald Trump received about 75,000,000 votes — that’s about 31% of the total eligible vote. Logically, a candidate would have to at least get the votes of more than 50% of all the eligible voters to justify claiming that a mandate was granted by the voters; otherwise, if only one eligible voter cast a ballot, the candidate who got that one vote could claim a unanimous mandate for the proposed agenda. And that’s nonsense.
(2) Let’s get constitutional. Getting elected President does not automatically give the new President the right to put anyone his or her heart desires into his or her cabinet — Article II,.Section 2 of the Constitution states that the President “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.” In other words, the Senate must favorably vote to accept the nominee or the President’s choice is not going to get the job..
So what’s happening now is names are being floated, because Donald Trump will not be sworn in as President until January 20, 2025 and only then will he be authorized, as President, to nominate his chosen candidates. Over the centuries that this process has played out with each new President, many candidates have been rejected by the Senate and many have withdrawn their names or had their names withdrawn by the President. There will be a lot of “horse trading” going on behind the scenes because the Senate is a co-equal part of the governmental structure. It’s another part of the constitutional system that is structured to force compromise on the elected leaders (and sometimes it backfires and highly qualified nominees get booted, or sometimes highly unqualified nominees get pushed into positions of power).
I am soo excited about the proposed changes and improvements. I would once again counsel our young adults to join our warriors instead of becoming cannon fader.
I would also recommend the injustice of families who have worked for years, if not decades, paid taxes and still have no path of earning the benefits of citizenship.
One example is where a father entered the US under the Green Card program and did not ensure his children could legally stay in the US. Now those families are in fear of being approached by Police and deported. Shame on our Political system.