This is the very essence of the difference that should exist between a President and a King. From Federalist 69:
The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and, upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law. The person of the king of Great Britain is sacred and inviolable; there is no constitutional tribunal to which he is amenable; no punishment to which he can be subjected without involving the crisis of a national revolution. In this delicate and important circumstance of personal responsibility, the President of Confederated America would stand upon no better ground than a governor of New York, and upon worse ground than the governors of Maryland and Delaware.
The failure of the Republican party to support this kind of check on Presidential power is why we’re having this crisis now.
I mean, the constitution never said the supreme court has the power of judivial review, the supreme court at the time just grabbed the power, and congress at the time just went along with it. The supreme court only held on to the power because of “norms and traditions”. Today’s congress could simply just pass a resolution declaring the supreme court has no such power, and all that 200+ years of “norms and traditions” is gone. And all the law enforcement, national guard, and military people would just be like “seems legit” and go along with everything trump decrees.