Congress passed a law shutting down TikTok, and President Trump flouted it. Congress required advance notification for removing inspectors general, and the Trump administration fired them on the spot. Congress approved trillions of dollars in spending, and Mr. Trump ordered it frozen unless the federal programs receiving it passed his ideological litmus tests.
The new administration is quickly demonstrating that it does not intend to be bound by legal niceties or traditional checks and balances in its relationship with Congress. That has alarmed Democrats but drawn shrugs and approval from Republicans, who say that Mr. Trump is delivering what he promised even if it comes at the expense of Congress’s authority and constitutional status as a coequal branch of government.
“President Trump clearly ran for office to be a disrupter, and he’s going to continue to do that,” said Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, the No. 2 Republican.
Mr. Trump is also clearly embarking on a test of what he can cow a Congress under total Republican control into swallowing. Early indications are that it will be a lot.
In addition to his rush to snatch the power of the purse away from lawmakers, he has sent up a crop of cabinet nominees who would have never passed muster on Capitol Hill in the past, daring Republicans to either back them or risk the wrath of the movement behind Mr. Trump. All but a few have snapped into line.
He has offered a governmentwide payout to entice millions of federal workers to resign, with scant recognition that Congress might want a say in such a drastic reshaping of the government it funds.
“He’s testing his own authority,” Senator Kevin Cramer, Republican of North Dakota, said of the president’s anti-Congress flex. “He’s getting some guidance that presidents have more authority than they have traditionally used.”
Indeed, the administration’s position is that when it comes to the executive branch, the White House has absolute power to do what it pleases even if it is Congress that provides the money for the entire government with specific instructions on how it should be spent.
“The White House Counsel’s Office believes that this is within the president’s power to do it, and therefore he’s doing it,” Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, told reporters this week about the president’s directive to pause federal funding approved by Congress, which was later temporarily blocked by a federal judge.
The original order from the Office of Management and Budget was rescinded on Wednesday after widespread confusion over its impact, loud warnings from Democrats that vital services were at risk and a lawsuit that resulted in a court order halting it.
The reversal was definitely not because congressional Republicans had complained that the president was overstepping his authority. Quite the opposite.
“I, for one, am glad to have a president in the White House who is delivering on his promise to get our fiscal house in order,” Representative Tom Emmer of Minnesota, the No. 3 House Republican, told reporters at the House G.O.P. retreat held at Mr. Trump’s Doral golf resort near Miami as he and others defended the president’s plan.
The absence of pushback from congressional Republicans is a stark acknowledgment that Mr. Trump is large and in charge, controlling their political futures while executing an agenda that they believe Republican voters demanded. It is a distinct break from the past, when lawmakers of both parties would vigorously defend Congress’s power — particularly the spending power granted in Article 1 of the Constitution — no matter who was in the White House.
Other top Republicans sought to minimize the import of the spending pause. They noted that President Joseph R. Biden Jr. had moved quickly after his inauguration in 2021 to hold up money for completing the first Trump administration’s border wall. That action was far less sweeping than the new Trump order and was later validated as within the power of the administration by the Government Accountability Office.
“I think any of these funding decisions are not unusual for a new administration,” said Senator John Thune, the South Dakota Republican and majority leader. “They’re pausing, taking a look at where money is being spent, how it’s being spent, and ensuring that it’s spent wisely and well and in accordance with this administration’s plans.”
Democrats were apoplectic, accusing the administration of a gross abuse of power.
“If this stands, then Congress may as well adjourn, because the implications of this is the executive can pick and choose which congressional enactments they will execute,” said Senator Angus King, the independent from Maine who caucuses with Democrats.
The administration’s hasty reversal heartened Democrats who have been back on their heels since the opening of Congress, with limited options to impede the White House given their minority status in both chambers. But they expect Mr. Trump to persist in what they portrayed as a lawless effort to subvert the will of Congress and intend to protest in whatever ways they can.
“Make no mistake,” said Senator Patty Murray of Washington, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, “the fight is far from over.”
One leading Republican, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, noted that a mechanism existed for Mr. Trump, in conjunction with Congress, to “reprogram” spending that the White House did not like, though so far there is little sign the administration wants to take that potentially time-consuming and contentious approach.
“It’s not as if there isn’t a process if, during the year, it is found that money needs to be reallocated within a department,” said Ms. Collins, who chairs the Appropriations Committee and was one of the few Republicans to challenge the spending order. “But it requires congressional approval, as it should.”
The White House encountered mild bipartisan resistance to its decision to abruptly fire multiple inspectors general from various agencies. Senators Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa and a longtime proponent of empowering inspectors general, and Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, joined forces and wrote Mr. Trump asking him to account for why he had made the firings without the required 30-day notification to Congress and accompanying justification.
“While I.G.’s aren’t immune from committing acts requiring their removal, and they can be removed by the president, the law must be followed,” the letter said.
But their plea was cast aside, both at the White House and by other Republicans.
“This is much ado about nothing,” Mr. Emmer said on CNBC as he dismissed the notification requirements as unimportant details. “The president of the United States has the complete and absolute right to determine whether these people are going to stay on with the administration or not.”
Other Republicans characterized the outcry over the Trump administration actions as an overblown reaction to a new White House getting its footing.
“This is a work in progress,” said Senator Jim Risch, Republican of Idaho. “Everybody take a deep breath, stay calm.”
It seems doubtful that calm will settle in anytime soon. But it does appear certain that any challenge to the Trump administration’s efforts to erode Congress’s power will come not from Republicans on Capitol Hill, but from Democrats, the states and in the courts.
“I’d be surprised if Congress initiated a lawsuit or asked for a stay,” said Mr. Cramer, the North Dakota senator. “But there will be plenty of others that will.”
Catie Edmondson contributed reporting from Miami.
