President Donald Trump late yesterday said he may consider rejoining the World Health Organization — days after signing an executive order announcing America's intention to leave.

— POLITICO Europe (@politico.eu) 2025-01-26T11:27:28.969Z

It is only a little over a week since the inauguration of Donald Trump as 47^th President of the USA. He has had a busy time of it with a flurry of Executive Orders on a wide range of issues, in line with his agenda. He certainly wasted little time, and this instant impact is a sharp contrast to the lethargic start of the Starmer government in Blighty. Perhaps a 3 month transition has its merits.

Historically Executive orders were directions on implementation of laws passed by Congress, but Trump seems to see them as his own laws. Several of his Executive Orders seem to exceed the Constitutional powers of his office. It seems likely that the 14^th Amendment makes his ending of birthright citizenship unconstitutional, and some of his spending freezes clash with the financial powers reserved to Congress in the US Tripartite system.

Other Executive Orders are being disputed by various States and Courts. Some of his Executive appointments are so manifestly unsuitable that we have to go back to Classical Rome to find Nero’s horse as Consul to find a comparison.

The Republicans are in a strong position with The Presidency, Senate and Supreme Court all under effective control, with the House of Representatives a narrower margin of control, and now Republicans all kneel before the Trump MAGA agenda.

It seems there is little to hold Trump back, and he certainly has no record of sticking to conventions and precedent. Yet there are restraints: The USA is a federal system, with many powers reserved to the 50 States, and a substantial minority of these are under Democrat control.

There is also a written Constitution that is very difficult to amend, and has a significance unmatched in Britain. It could not be more revered if it was sent down carved in stone by a holy prophet. While the Republican dominated Supreme Court is openly behind his agenda, and can twist the Constitution into shapes that a balloon tying clown could barely conceive, they do need to at least give lip service to Constitutional support.

Britons can look on with a mixture of horror and amusement, tempered by our own politicians either besotted or reverse ferreting obsequiously in reaction to Trump, but the thought does niggle away. Could something similar happen here?

If a charismatic charlatan were to ride a wave of Right or Left wing Populist anger all the way to Downing St, with a majority of newly elected MPs in the Commons what could stand in his or her way? We have an unwritten Constitution based almost entirely on convention and precedent. It is extremely dependent on following unwritten rules.

Let us look at what institutions could temper such an individual:

The Head of State: Our elderly and infirm King could in theory dismiss such an individual, in a manner similar to the end of the Whitlam government in Australia, but such a crisis would be unprecedented since the Seventeenth Century, and this time it might mean the end of the Monarchy. Such would lack any democratic legitimacy.

The Courts: Without a written and difficult to amend Constitution these would have limited power, as any ruling is reliant on the government abiding by the ruling. In any case either primary legislation could overrule these, or abrogate the international treaties and conventions such as the ECHR that would underpin such a ruling.

The House of Lords: This is amongst the weakest of upper houses in the world, in part because it can only delay legislation, and in part because it has no democratic legitimacy. In any case if an item were in the manifesto of our charismatic leader, it could not be stopped because of the Parliament Act.

Devolved nations, local government and regional mayors: these have far fewer powers than US States, and are dependent on central government funds for day to day finance. They could make a lot of noise, but do little else.

So we would look to non-governmental agents. The City and Financial Markets have great power, and we don’t need to go back as far as the Glorious Revolution to see them in action. They saw off Ms Truss as PM in a matter of weeks. But what if she had called their bluff and stuck to her guns, willing to allow a bonds and pensions crisis?

Who else could restrain such a tyrant? Not a military coup by our avowedly apolitical and enfeebled military, who lack such a tradition. The London mob or a peasants revolt? We do have a tradition of such civil unrest, but have to go back to the poll tax riots to see such political street disturbances here. European and International bodies? Even before Brexit these could not intervene, at worst they could shun us.

So a Britain Trump would have even fewer restraints on his or her capricious and vengeful actions than our friends across the Atlantic. Our only real option is not to elect such a monster in the first place, but in these heady days of Populism, Social Media misinformation and malign overseas influence we should not discount that it might happen.

So applaud, laugh or clutch your pearls at the antics in Washington, but imagine how we would cope in such circumstances. Remember too that that such a Populist PM could come from either Left, Right, or even a mix of both in these febrile times, and on as little as a third of the popular vote. It may well not be someone that you approve. Those who vote for the Face Eating Leopards Party never think that their face might be first.

No nightmares please!

Foxy