Skip to main content
United StatesPoliticsSyllabus dot point

How and why has presidential power expanded over time, and how do Federalist No. 70 and the contrasting interpretations of the office frame that debate?

Topic 2.6 Expansion of Presidential Power: explain how presidents have interpreted and justified their use of formal and informal powers.

A focused answer to AP US Government Topic 2.6: how presidential power has expanded over time, the argument of Federalist No. 70 for an energetic executive, and the debate over limited versus expansive interpretations of the office.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.811 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this topic is asking
  2. What Federalist No. 70 argues
  3. How the office has grown
  4. The limited-versus-expansive debate
  5. Why this matters for the exam
  6. Try this

What this topic is asking

Topic 2.6 traces how the presidency has grown far beyond what Article II seems to describe, and asks you to debate whether that growth is appropriate. The College Board pairs this topic with the required foundational document Federalist No. 70, which defends a strong executive, and with the ongoing argument between limited and expansive views of the office.

What Federalist No. 70 argues

How the office has grown

Presidential power has expanded along several lines the exam expects you to recognize:

  • War and national security. Presidents have committed forces abroad without formal declarations of war, citing the commander-in-chief role, leading Congress to pass the War Powers Resolution to reassert its authority.
  • Informal powers. Executive orders, executive agreements, and signing statements let presidents act without legislation, expanding influence over policy.
  • The administrative state. The growth of the federal bureaucracy under presidential direction gives the executive vast reach over implementation.
  • Communication. The bully pulpit and modern media let presidents shape the national agenda directly.

The limited-versus-expansive debate

Critics of expansion warn of an imperial presidency, an office so powerful it escapes meaningful checks, especially in wartime. Defenders reply that Congress retains the purse, oversight, and impeachment, and that the courts retain judicial review, so the system self-corrects. This unresolved tension is exactly what the Argument Essay asks you to weigh.

Why this matters for the exam

Topic 2.6 is a natural Argument Essay topic (does expansion threaten the balance?) and a Concept Application topic (war powers, executive action). Federalist No. 70 is the document to deploy when the prompt concerns the strength of the office.

Try this

Q1. State the central argument of Federalist No. 70. [Recall]

  • Cue. A single, energetic executive provides good government through decisive action and clear accountability.

Q2. Explain one way Congress has tried to limit the expansion of presidential war powers. [Short explanation]

  • Cue. The War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress and withdraw forces after 60 days without congressional authorisation.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of College Board exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

AP 2019 (style)3 marksA president commits military forces to a foreign conflict for several months without a formal declaration of war from Congress. A. Identify the constitutional tension this action raises. B. Explain how Federalist No. 70 might justify the president's action. C. Explain one way Congress has tried to limit this kind of presidential action.
Show worked answer →

A Concept Application FRQ, 3 points (A, B, C).

A. Identify: the tension between the president's role as commander-in-chief and Congress's sole power to declare war.

B. Explain Federalist No. 70: it argues for "energy in the executive", a single, decisive president able to act quickly in a crisis, which supports rapid military action.

C. Explain a congressional limit: the War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress and withdraw forces after 60 days without authorisation; Congress can also cut funding.

Markers reward identifying the war-powers tension and citing Federalist No. 70's energetic-executive argument.

AP 2022 (style)6 marksDevelop an argument about whether the expansion of presidential power threatens the constitutional balance among the branches. Use at least one piece of evidence from one of the following: the Constitution of the United States or Federalist No. 70. Provide a defensible thesis, evidence and reasoning, and a response to an opposing perspective.
Show worked answer →

An Argument Essay FRQ, 6-point rubric.

Thesis (1): e.g. "The expansion of presidential power strains the balance, but congressional and judicial checks keep it within constitutional bounds."

Evidence (up to 3): the commander-in-chief and execution clauses of Article II; Federalist No. 70 on energy in the executive; the override and the purse.

Reasoning (1): explain how growth in executive action is matched by the other branches' tools.

Alternative perspective (1): concede that an "imperial presidency" can outrun checks in crises, then argue the structure ultimately reasserts itself.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this