WASHINGTON — Kamala Harris has unveiled an ambitious set of policies as part of her presidential campaign that have a common theme: going it alone.

The California senator is proposing action on long-held Democratic values — legalizing undocumented immigrants, combatting gun violence and ensuring women are paid the same as men for equal work.

But unlike many of her competitors, Harris would tackle those priorities with a novel set of executive actions that would require nothing from Congress.

The approach reflects a growing disillusionment with Washington’s ability to legislate, a realism about Democrats’ electoral prospects, and an appetite for action among voters.

But leaning on executive action also carries risks that have deterred past Democrats from embracing it so thoroughly. Such actions can be tied up for years in litigation and lay a road map for a future president to undo the work.

Former President Barack Obama initially downplayed his ability to change laws in encouraging Congress to act, telling a Univision interviewer in fall 2010, “I’m president, not king.” But Republicans took the House that year and began blocking most of his policies — leading Obama to unveil a “We Can’t Wait” executive action agenda headed into his re-election campaign.

President Trump has also sought to achieve much of his agenda through executive action, but often has been thwarted by the courts.

Harris, for her part, says she is looking for big changes she can make immediately.

Her latest proposal centers on undocumented immigrants. She announced that as president, she would reinstate and expand Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, an executive action that granted work permits and protection from deportation to young undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as children. Trump has tried to end DACA, but has been blocked by federal courts.

Harris said she would also extend protections to undocumented parents of U.S. citizens or legal residents and other law-abiding immigrants with strong community ties.

Obama’s program offered no way for protected undocumented immigrants to pursue becoming a citizen. Democrats have advocated legislation to do so, including the 2-decade-old Dream Act that gave the name “Dreamers” to those affected by the policy. The bill has never made it to a president’s desk.

Harris’ proposal would accomplish some of that goal without Congress’ help, pushing regulations to remove barriers to applying for citizenship for DACA recipients. Her campaign estimates the plan would give 2 million immigrants a path to citizenship and protect up to 6 million from deportation. DACA protected fewer than 1 million in its five years in full force.

It’s not the first time Harris, a former California attorney general and San Francisco district attorney, has embraced executive authority in her campaign. She has targeted presidential power for her policies on gun control and equal pay, other areas where Congress has a long record of stalemate.

“The majority of my career I’ve spent in the executive branch, so exercising executive power is something that I do and I’m used to,” Harris told The Chronicle. “But on issues like this one, there’s also the reality that a day in the life of these Dreamers, especially the DACA recipients, is a very long time. And until there’s any movement in terms of legislation, action needs to be taken.”

On guns, Harris proposed regulations to expand the types of arms sellers who would be required to conduct background checks of purchasers, closing the gun-show loophole that advocates have failed to persuade Republicans in Congress to eliminate. She also said her Justice Department would take gun manufacturers and dealers that break the law to court. She pledged the actions if Congress fails to pass gun control legislation in her first 100 days.

Harris also turned to what Obama referred to as the presidential pen strategy as part of her proposal to equalize disparities in salaries between men and women. Although part of the policy would require legislation, her campaign said she wouldn’t “wait for Congress to act” and would make federal contracts contingent on companies paying employees equally for equal work.

Harris has staked these proposals on the president’s powers in a way that contrasts with other candidates.

Many of her 2020 competitors, including Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, tout ideas that would reshape America to benefit workers over corporations and would require Congress to pass legislation. Former Vice President Joe Biden faced a raft of criticism from the left for saying his vision of bipartisanship was not dead, and that Republicans would work with his administration.

Democratic veterans say Harris’ approach reflects a realization that even if her party takes Congress next year, any Senate majority will be narrow and that bipartisan action in Washington is increasingly rare.

And with a field that is competing to put out policy plans, Harris’ approach could be a way to convince voters that she can actually turn her ideas into action, they say.

“One reason why having a policy agenda that is heavy on executive action is important is it answers a very important question, which is: How are you going to get this done?” said Dan Pfeiffer, a former Obama communications director. “This is a question that has bedeviled a lot of candidates.”

Tom Jawetz, vice president of immigration policy at the progressive Center for American Progress Action Fund and a former House counsel, said Harris’ time as a legislator may have taught her that executive action is the way to go.

Harris is a “seasoned legislator” who “understands the lay of the land in Congress today,” Jawetz said. “I think she’s right to be sure that the agenda for the American people is not held hostage by inaction in the Senate.”

But the approach has downsides. Much of Obama’s legacy, lacking the force of congressional action, has been undone by Trump. Both Obama and Trump were stymied by litigation, including on DACA.

Pfeiffer and another veteran of the Obama administration, former Labor and Cabinet Secretary Chris Lu, agreed that legislation is generally preferable to executive action. But they also think candidates should be skeptical of what Congress can accomplish.

“It is a smart political strategy. It shows decisiveness, it allows you to act quickly,” Lu said. “The truth is, and Trump has learned this, the appearance of action is almost as important as action itself. I think if you were to ask Trump’s base about some of the steps he has taken, many of them would say he has already done these things, notwithstanding the fact that many of them are stuck in litigation.”

Harris, for her part, said she was not deterred by the fact that executive actions can be undone.

“There is actually a strong amount of bipartisan support in this building to move it forward through legislation,” Harris said. “But we need to do something immediately, and that’s the point of the executive action.”

Tal Kopan is The San Francisco Chronicle’s Washington correspondent. Email: tal.kopan@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @talkopan