By admin 
Sign up for Executive Dysfunction, a newsletter that highlights one under-the-radar story each week about how Trump is changing the law—or how the law is pushing back. You’ll also receive updates on the latest from Slate’s Jurisprudence team.
Read more It’s Not Too Late for Congress to Undo One of the Worst Supreme Court Decisions of the Last Term
Mark Paoletta is not a household name. Despite this, over the past decade, he has quietly become one of the conservative legal movement’s most influential operators, making Paoletta an underrated political power in his own right.
Over a career spanning roles in both House and Senate Republican leadership, the George H.W. Bush White House, the courts, and conservative advocacy organizations, Paoletta has formulated and defended expansive legal theories of presidential power, molding governing reality. Today he is helping Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought reshape the federal bureaucracy. Understanding why he matters means understanding that the modern federal government is shaped not only by elected officials but also by attorneys who craft legal arguments justifying government action.
There are two central components to Paoletta’s dangerous philosophy: fury at the independence of the civil service, and belief in nearly unlimited presidential authority. Close D.C. watchers should recognize these as the calling cards of Voughtism. Indeed, Vought and Paoletta are close allies—Vought executes the dubious budgetary procedures; Paoletta handles the legal arguments. As Politico’s Sophia Cai rightly points out, “If Russ Vought sees his question to dismantle the federal bureaucracy as a race against time, his lawyer sidekick Mark Paoletta is holding the stopwatch.” As Cai goes on to mention, Paoletta has been the center of Vought’s team, ensuring that funds are withheld from furloughed workers and redirected to Donald Trump’s ridiculous vanity projects.
Between the two Trump administrations, Paoletta bided his time as a senior fellow at Vought’s Center for Renewing America, the Trump-aligned think tank that effectively was another administration in waiting. There, alongside other Trump officials, like Ken Cuccinelli and Kash Patel, Paoletta wrote multiple articles about impoundment and expanding executive authority. One of those pieces bemoaned Congress’ constraints on the president’s ability to spend. that the Impoundment Control Act “reverses an understanding of the Constitution’s allocation of executive and congressional spending authority dating to the Founding. The ICA is unconstitutional.”
For the record, this is nonsense. Fundamentally, what makes a legislature powerful is its control over taxing and spending, the power of the purse. That goes back to precolonial Parliament and the Magna Carta—at best, Paoletta is staggeringly ignorant of the “history and tradition” that conservative legalists claim to adore; at worst, his arguments indicate that he is an unrepentant monarchist (at least when a MAGA king is on the throne). Paoletta uses the real estate he is allotted to rationalize why presidents should be able to usurp the constitutional authority of other co-equal branches of government.
In the second Trump administration, Paoletta has been able to move his extreme views from theory into action. In January 2025, the OMB that ordered all federal agencies to “temporarily pause all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all federal financial assistance.” Chaos immediately ensued, resulting in the memo being rescinded 48 hours later. According to anonymous sources, Paoletta “almost lost his job” because the memo—his handiwork—was published without any consultation with the president’s staff. However, as Politico notes, “The signal was unmistakable: Vought’s OMB intended to probe the boundaries of its authority.” Paoletta was just making sure that could happen.
Read more Stop, Collaborate, and Listen: Trump Is Back, and Wow, He’s Griftin’
Paoletta has also fought against the independent Government Accountability Office’s efforts to tamp down the OMB’s violations of budget law. Deriding the GAO as “JV Congress,” Paoletta instructed the Department of Transportation to ignore the GAO’s ruling that the administration’s freeze on electric-vehicle funding was unlawful. Paoletta unilaterally demanded that a federal agency ignore its peer because he worked for the White House, and under his extreme philosophy, that grants him complete executive authority.
Recently, he was appointed deputy director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Last month, the Washington Post reported that Paoletta, serving as the bureau’s chief legal officer, sent questionnaires to small lenders, a move that would typically be beyond the CFPB’s reach, pressing for financial records and compliance documents. Although the agency possesses broad authority to issue market-monitoring requests, these lenders generally fall below its $10 billion supervisory threshold and therefore are not ordinarily subject to this level of scrutiny. One of the organizations targeted was the Self-Help Ventures Fund, a Durham-based lender that is affiliated with a consumer-protection group opposing Trump’s attempts to destroy the bureau.
At first glance, this might appear to be another agency dispute, but it is so much more than that. Echoing the Lochner era, in which the egalitarian 14th Amendment was weaponized by Gilded Age plutocrats and their legal stooges to entrench elite interests, the CFPB under Paoletta and Vought is using a law designed with progressive ends in mind to implement long-standing conservative policy. Paoletta is unabashedly ending almost all law enforcement by the bureau—except when it can be deployed as a political weapon against perceived GOP opponents. Paoletta has advocated for nearly unfettered presidential control. Now that he is back in government, Paoletta is manipulating the tools available to him to operationalize this. He didn’t invent the CFPB’s legal power; he’s simply repurposing it. The market-monitoring authority ordinarily consulted to understand financial markets was instead directed toward organizations that administration officials had publicly criticized. That distinction illustrates how Paoletta’s contribution is less about purported legal principles and more about legal authorities’ ability to operationalize the broader Vought agenda.
His influence extends well beyond his partnership with Vought. He is also a major player within the right’s Supreme Court schemes. Over his decadeslong career, he has played crucial roles in the confirmations of Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. Paoletta and Thomas share a close personal friendship: the former even served as legal counsel to the latter’s wife after she was called before the House to testify about her role in the Jan. 6 insurrection. In addition, Paoletta has glorified Thomas as a legal commentator for years, including in a book he edited and in a documentary that features 25 hours of interviews with Thomas about his life. Naturally, Paoletta is a leading figure in the Federalist Society, which has been wreaking havoc on the country’s judicial nominations and legal academia for decades now.
Paoletta rarely occupies center stage. Much like Vought, he prefers to stay out of the limelight. However, administrations are built not just by presidents, Cabinet secretaries, and the enormous federal workforce. They are built by lawyers who develop legal arguments that make policy possible. If Vought is supplying the ideological vision, Mark Paoletta is supplying the legal architecture to carry it out. The Obama administration disclaimed accountability for John Yoo, who was roughly the Mark Paoletta of the George W. Bush administration. The next non-MAGA president may want to consider investigating an alternative path.
Read more What We Can Learn From Trump’s Short-Lived “Historic Breakthrough” in Gaza