One of the most caricatured political figures in world history was, without a doubt, Louis XIV, king of France for over 70 years. As the monarch who embodies the current notion of absolutism, the so-called “Sun King”, in reference to the use of the star as a symbol of the French monarchy, Louis XIV ruled as the highest authority in his country, centralizing practically all power in his hands.

Even though the traditional separation of powers did not exist at the time, there is a contemporary leader who is acquiring similar characteristics to the French, attacking part of the state structure of his country and building a personalist vision of himself, namely Donald Trump, president of the United States.

Since taking office on January 20 of this year, Trump has adopted a different position from his first term in relation to the country's demands, being combative with opposition institutions or politicians and building his own image that places his authority above other powers. In this sense, how can this “Sun President” project affect the American population, especially Latinos?

Last week, a case caught the media’s attention involving the White House’s more intense deportation policy, involving federal judge James Boasberg. In short, the White House invoked the “Alien Enemies Act”, of 1798, to expedite deportation in the United States. Approved more than two centuries ago, this law has been used only a few times by the American government, such as during World War II against Americans of Japanese, German and Italian origin, facilitating their deportation orimprisonment. In other words, this legislation is applied against individuals who represent a threat to the American government or population, a characteristic that is controversial to define. In order to keep his campaign promise, Trump used the law to speed up the deportation of individuals, the most recent case being that of Venezuelans allegedly linked to the “Tren de Aragua” gang who were sent to El Salvador. In the dispute, Boasberg prevented the executive branch from using the law, pointing out the need for a more in-depth domestic analysis before a speedy deportation. However, the reaction from Trump and his cabinet was strong.

In an explosive statement, Tom Horman, the so-called “Border Czar” of the Trump administration, said that he “doesn’t care what the judges think”, insinuating a rejection by the White House of Boasberg’s decision. In addition, press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the judge had no “legal basis” to prevent the flight, because when the order was issued, the plane with the deportees was already outside of USairspace. Trump also adopted rhetoric calling for Boasberg’s removal from office, highlighting an unprecedented question: how far does the president’s power and his executive orders go?

In an interview organized by the University of Michigan, political science professor Mitchel Sollenberger analyzed Trump’s intentions before taking office this year, regarding the use of many executive orders. In addition to highlighting that other recent presidents have already used this executive power to implement their agendas, such as Barack Obama and George W. Bush, the professor highlights that this practice fits into a presidential culture that began with Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, who defended greater executive power in relation to the legislative and judicial branches.

A few years after Wilson's term, for example, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Teddy Roosevelt's fifth cousin, was elected president four times and used many executive powers during the war period to guarantee his actions and his great New Deal. However, as Sollenberger points out, Trump has a discourse that emphasizes the importance of executive orders for his government, something that, combined with his conservative and extremist views, creates a view that the White House would have the legitimacy to carry out movements that, even if they are within the sphere of the president's signature, can bypass the judiciary, as exemplified by the recent deportations.

The statements by the White House press secretary about Boasberg's decision and the comments by the “Border Czar” show how the executive branch of the United States is moving towards an almost total legitimization of the president's power. On the official White House website, an accusatory article against the former administration used the following phrase: “The CNN fake news losers tried to fact-check, but President Trump was right (as always)”. The article itself was about the Biden administration’s spending on hormone studies, but the words and the accusatory manner denote the conservative and personalist narrative that the president has inserted into the country’s federal power. A few centuries ago, the so-called “People’s House” would have been a cousin of the Palace of Versailles.

In this way, the “MAGA” project is gaining strength with this narrative of Trump, who uses executive orders, wartime laws and even declarations of national emergency to advance deportations and the conservative agenda. For example, on the day he took office, the president declared a national emergency on the border with Mexico, which facilitated the sending of military personnel to the region. In addition, English was declared the country's official language for the first time since its independence from the United Kingdom, an order that will affect the 41 million inhabitants who have Spanish as their first language. It is worth noting that, in the last election, Donald Trump won 42% of the votes from Latino/Hispanic voters, against 56% for Kamala Harris. Even though the candidate had an absolute majority, the Republican's result was the highest for his party since 2004.

Finally, in such a situation, there is growing fear in the international system regarding a “Sun” president. The Trump administration is gradually moving towards an isolated leadership without any legal support even from its own country. Another example of this is the possible kick-off for a trade war through tariffs, adopting a protectionist stance and breaking historical agreements with strategic allies in Latin America, such as Mexico, undermining long-standing relations. From this perspective, if a president manages to break long-standing alliances with Latin countries, what will become of a people considered foreign in a blue and red giant?

History tells us that leaders who are disconnected from the reality of the population and who exercise excessive authority face drastic consequences. Marie Antoinette, wife of King Louis XVI, is said to have sealed her fate by uttering, with disdain and without seeking to learn about the people, the supposed phrase: "If they have no bread, let them eat brioche." Likewise, the Trump administration seems to be out of touch with the needs of its population, especially Latino immigrants, who face rapid deportations based on questionable laws from the 18th century. News reports reveal accounts of individuals being deported without proper trial and in a violent manner, intensifying the climate of social instability. Given this, it is worth asking: how long can a “Sun” government last? Is the world's greatest power on the brink of a political crisis?