Final answer:
The Obama and Trump presidencies showcase different degrees of presidential power and constraints by other branches. While Obama faced limitations due to a divided government, he utilized executive actions to pursue his policy goals. Trump, on the other hand, had favorable conditions in Congress but faced judicial checks on his exercise of power.
Step-by-step explanation:
The presidents in the case studies of Obama and Trump demonstrate varying degrees of power and constraints imposed by other branches. In the American political system, the presidency is designed with a balance of power among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. While presidents have formal powers outlined in the Constitution, their ability to wield power effectively often depends on their skill in navigating the political landscape and interacting with other branches.
During the Obama presidency, he faced constraints imposed by the divided government, where Republicans controlled the majority in Congress. This limited his ability to push forward his policy agenda, as legislative measures required cooperation and compromise from both sides. However, Obama utilized executive actions, such as executive orders, to pursue his policy goals in areas where he had greater discretion, such as immigration reform and environmental regulations.
In contrast, the Trump presidency witnessed a Republican-controlled Congress during the initial years, which granted him more opportunities to advance his policy priorities, such as tax cuts and deregulation. However, Trump's exercise of power faced challenges in the form of judicial checks, where his executive actions were subject to legal challenges and scrutiny by the courts. The Supreme Court rulings have both expanded and limited presidential power throughout history, thereby constraining the president's ability to wield unchecked authority.