25 Years After 9/11, Presidents Still Wield More Power, Panel Says

BichDuong
September 12, 2026

25 Years After 9/11, Presidents Still Wield More Power, Panel Says

Twenty-five years after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, a panel of historians, legal scholars and former national-security officials says the crisis that transformed America also permanently changed the balance of presidential power.

On September 11, 2026, the United States marked the 25th anniversary of the attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people and reshaped American politics, national security and foreign policy. Across New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, families, survivors, first responders and public officials gathered to remember those who were lost and to reflect on a quarter-century of consequences. (Reuters)

But the anniversary has also prompted a deeper question: What did 9/11 change about the American presidency — and how much of that change remains today?

A panel hosted by the University of Virginia’s Miller Center of Public Affairs recently examined that question in a discussion titled “The Evolution of Presidential Power After 9/11.” According to the university, panel members argued that presidents gained significant authority from emergency measures adopted after the attacks, and that some of those powers have remained in place for the past 25 years. (UVA Today)

The day that changed America

The attacks began on the morning of September 11, 2001, when 19 al-Qaeda hijackers took control of four commercial airplanes.

At 8:46 a.m., American Airlines Flight 11 struck the North Tower of the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan. Seventeen minutes later, United Airlines Flight 175 hit the South Tower.

The attacks were broadcast live around the world.

A third aircraft, American Airlines Flight 77, struck the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia. A fourth plane, United Airlines Flight 93, crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after passengers attempted to regain control of the aircraft.

The 9/11 Commission’s official account says the attacks killed 2,977 people, while the broader anniversary commemorations also recognize victims of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. (Ủy ban 911)

The attacks shocked the country and produced an immediate demand for stronger national security measures.

Congress passed major legislation, the federal government reorganized its security institutions, and President George W. Bush declared a national emergency.

That emergency declaration is still in effect 25 years later.

According to the University of Virginia panel, every succeeding president has renewed it. (UVA Today)

How emergency powers changed the presidency

The Miller Center discussion brought together scholars and former officials with experience spanning several administrations.

Participants included former Miller Center director Philip Zelikow, presidential historian Russell Riley, University of Virginia law professor Ashley Deeks, political scientist Chris Edelson and retired Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, who served under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. (UVA Today)

Their discussion focused on a fundamental change in how presidents exercise executive authority during national emergencies.

William Antholis, director and CEO of the Miller Center, said the decisions made during the weeks, months and years following the attacks reshaped the relationship between the president, Congress, the courts, the military, intelligence agencies and the American public. (UVA Today)

The change did not happen overnight.

The attacks created an extraordinary national-security crisis, and Americans overwhelmingly expected the federal government to act quickly to prevent another catastrophe.

That environment gave the executive branch greater room to act.

The United States launched military operations in Afghanistan, later invaded Iraq, expanded intelligence capabilities and introduced broader security measures at home and abroad.

The consequences were enormous — and many of the institutions and authorities created or strengthened during that period remain part of the American government today.

A state of emergency that never ended

One of the most striking points raised by the panel is the longevity of the post-9/11 emergency.

The national emergency declared by President Bush after the attacks remains active 25 years later, with successive presidents renewing it.

That does not mean the United States has remained in the same state of crisis for 25 years. Instead, the continuing declaration illustrates how temporary emergency measures can become part of the long-term structure of government.

Panelist Russell Riley noted that American presidents had faced emergencies before 9/11. However, he said earlier presidents often eventually backed away from emergency powers rather than allowing them to become permanent features of governance. (UVA Today)

That distinction is at the heart of today’s debate.

When an emergency occurs, extraordinary presidential authority may appear necessary. But when the emergency lasts for years — or when the definition of an emergency expands — questions naturally arise about congressional oversight and constitutional limits.

Congress and the balance of power

The 9/11 Commission itself highlighted weaknesses in the relationship between the executive and legislative branches.

Its final report said Congress had been slow to adjust to terrorism as a national-security threat before the attacks. Congressional attention was divided among committees, and the legislative branch did not provide sufficient guidance or consistent oversight of executive agencies dealing with terrorism. (Ủy ban 911)

After 9/11, that relationship changed dramatically.

Congress gave the executive branch broad authority to respond to the new threat. The result was a stronger presidency, particularly in areas involving military operations, intelligence and national security.

Twenty-five years later, the question is whether that balance has shifted too far toward the White House.

Chris Edelson, another panelist, pointed to the changing definition of what qualifies as an emergency. He cited a 2026 example involving a national emergency declared by President Donald Trump concerning foreign-produced bulk-power system equipment. (UVA Today)

The example demonstrates why the debate extends beyond terrorism.

Once presidents possess broad emergency authorities, future administrations can potentially use similar mechanisms to address very different problems.

The power can move in either direction

Philip Zelikow offered a more nuanced view.

He argued that American politics does not move in a straight line when it comes to presidential authority. Instead, public reactions to successes and failures can cause the balance of power to shift.

In other words, presidents may gain authority during moments of national fear or crisis, but voters and institutions can later demand greater limits.

That makes the story of presidential power after 9/11 more complicated than simply saying that presidents became permanently stronger.

The American system still contains Congress, the courts, elections and public opinion — institutions capable of challenging executive authority.

But the experience of the last 25 years suggests that powers granted during emergencies can be difficult to reverse completely.

A legacy that reaches far beyond Washington

The political legacy of 9/11 is only one part of the anniversary.

The attacks transformed airport security, intelligence sharing, military policy and America’s approach to terrorism. They also affected generations of Americans who were born after the attacks and know September 11 primarily through history books, photographs and the stories of parents and grandparents.

The 9/11 Memorial & Museum says about one-third of the country is now too young to remember the attacks firsthand. Its 25th-anniversary programs are therefore focused not only on remembrance but also on teaching younger generations about the events and their consequences.

The physical memorial in New York also carries that history forward.

The two enormous reflecting pools occupy the footprints of the former Twin Towers. Water flows into the voids, creating what the World Trade Center describes as a representation of “absence made visible.” (Official World Trade Center)

For the 25th anniversary, a new moment of silence was added to recognize people who later lost their lives from illnesses associated with exposure after the attacks.

Twenty-five years later, the debate continues

The 25th anniversary is therefore about more than looking backward.

It is also an opportunity to examine how the United States responded to an unprecedented crisis — and whether those decisions continue to shape government today.

The Miller Center panel’s conclusion is particularly significant because presidential power remains one of the central questions in American democracy.

The attacks of September 11 created circumstances in which stronger executive authority appeared necessary. But a quarter-century later, scholars are asking whether some of those extraordinary powers have become too deeply embedded to disappear when the original emergency has passed.

Meanwhile, Americans continue to gather each September 11 to remember the people behind the statistics: parents, children, spouses, friends, firefighters, police officers, office workers, passengers and countless others whose lives were changed forever.

The central lesson of the anniversary may therefore be twofold: 9/11 changed how America understood national security, and it also changed how Americans understand presidential power.

Twenty-five years later, both legacies remain very much alive.