The increasingly realistic prospect of Donald Trump back in the White House has caused widespread alarm. New York Times writers foresee an authoritarian assault on our democracy that its institutional guardrails might be unable to contain. The Atlantic devoted an entire issue to this possibility. A prominent neocon joined in, warning of a potential Trump “dictatorship.” Others believe such concerns are nonsense or at least greatly exaggerated. However, many factors, some systemic and some specific to Trump, suggest that a second Trump term could indeed pose an unprecedented threat to our democracy. Consider:
The current state of our democracy is fragile and potentially vulnerable to an autocrat.
The distribution of power in our constitutional system has evolved in ways quite different from what the framers envisioned. Their original concept was that most government authority over the citizenry would continue to reside in and be diffused among the states, with the federal government confined to those powers expressly assigned it by the Constitution. Over time this balance of power has reversed; the federal government now exercises by far the greatest influence over the lives of American citizens.
The allocation of power within the federal government has also shifted dramatically. Congress, originally designed as the primary policymaking branch of the federal government, has abdicated much of its authority to the president and the vast executive branch bureaucracies he controls. Congress struggles to perform even its remaining core constitutional responsibilities. In practice, therefore, the president now holds most federal policymaking authority.
On top of this, our politics are broken. An effective democracy depends upon good faith, constructive interaction between political factions that share a common set of fundamental goals and beliefs although they compete over how best to effectuate them. Today’s politics are dominated by increasingly extreme, polarized factions whose only commonality is mutual contempt and whose agendas are at odds with the more moderate views of most Americans. The results:
-
- Almost two-thirds of voters believe the country is on the wrong track.
- The public has little confidence in any of our governmental institutions.
- Half of voters decline to identify with either party.
- Voters likely face a 2024 presidential choice between two wildly unpopular candidates.
The public itself bears much responsibility for this state of affairs. In a democracy, the citizens get the government they deserve. As Benjamin Franklin famously observed, the founders delivered to the people of the United States “a republic if you can keep it.” However, much of the public lacks interest in keeping it, instead tuning out of our democratic processes. Only about 60 to 67 percent of eligible voters voted in recent presidential elections, about 40 percent in mid-term general elections, and about 20 percent in primaries.
Trump clearly fits the mold of an autocrat.
By any objective standard, Trump is unfit to be president. He defied presidential and democratic norms throughout his chaotic first term. He became even more outrageous in the wake of his 2020 election loss, engaging in conduct that was clearly impeachable and perhaps criminal.
Even beyond his fraudulent efforts to overturn the election, Trump’s words and actions consistently demonstrate contempt for the rule of law and the core institutions of our democracy. His rhetoric is becoming ever more extreme and unhinged. Some of this may be hyperbole given his status as a world-class liar and con artist. However, to paraphrase Maya Angelou, when someone repeatedly shows you who they are by word and deed, believe them.
It’s hard to tell exactly what Trump would do in a second term. He is not a militarist or ultranationalist bent on world conquest. Indeed, he’s more of an isolationist who would embolden rather than challenge our foreign rivals. What is clear is that Trump’s only real interest is self-indulgence. Terminating the various federal prosecutions against him would surely be his first priority. He also seems intent on pursuing “vengeance” against his many perceived enemies, whatever that might entail. Beyond this, who knows?
Whatever Trump attempts, he would have plenty of enablers and few constraints in a second term.
Despite his glaring flaws, Trump remains the odds-on favorite among GOP voters. Hardly any Republican leaders and influencers, including his primary opponents, are willing to confront him; shamefully, most still embrace him. Evidently, they are fine with electing a president who scorns our democracy.
If Trump wins in November, these folks will most likely control both houses of Congress. The Senate math already strongly favors a Republican takeover of that body, and a Trump victory probably would boost enough Republicans to maintain or increase their House majority. Few if any Congressional Republicans have the courage or integrity to buck Trump. Thus, the legislative branch would be wholly subservient to him.
Nor would Trump face pushback from within his administration. Many distinguished Republicans and others served in Trump’s first term (often at great cost to their reputations) and provided some check on his worst impulses. His executive branch appointees a second time around would probably consist overwhelmingly of Trump sycophants all too willing to do his bidding without question.
Only the federal courts will stand in Trump’s way.
The one significant guardrail against Trump’s excesses would be the federal judiciary. Thus far, the courts have held up well against Trump. Federal judges and justices, including many appointed by Trump, ruled against some of his worst policies and uniformly rejected his bogus efforts to overturn the 2020 election. There is no objective reason to doubt that they would continue to do their jobs with integrity.
Unfortunately, there may be reason to doubt whether Trump would comply with their decisions. Over recent decades, both political parties have damaged public confidence in the courts and threatened their effectiveness by politicizing the judicial appointments process. Many on the left, displeased with the Supreme Court’s decisions, continue to level baseless attacks on the Court’s legitimacy. Such efforts to undermine the credibility of the courts may come back to bite them if Trump wins. He enthusiastically plays the same game of demonizing the courts when they displease him. He might well defy them during a second term if he thinks he could get away with it.
Critics would be wise to reconsider their relentless attacks on the federal judiciary. In the awful event that Trump returns to the White House, the judiciary will be our primary, and perhaps only, defense against him.
Well written and documented as usual. But ominous message. Marianne Williamson for President
Well done, Henry. I might quibble only with your conclusion (albeit at a very early date) that “If Trump wins in November, [Republican allies of Trump] will most likely control both houses of Congress… Thus, the legislative branch would be wholly subservient to him.”
I think it’s still possible that a pattern of the last couple of decades might prevail: voters deciding to keep their government divided, rather than united. The number of resignations/announced departures from Congress is escalating precisely because of the dysfunction you cite in government. And with the GOP majority in the House already a cliff-hanger, I think it’s at least possible that Congress might continue to be divided. Of course (I’m sure you’re exclaiming), divided government won’t actually facilitate better governance. Indeed, we have plenty of experience now of federal administrations only able to actually accomplish anything in the first year of a presidency. Even Trump experienced that. So I’m not sure my small disagreement with you on Congress would actually help anything.
I fear third party attempts – on either side, or both sides of the Great American Divide – would only diminish the chances of either presumptive Democratic or Republican candidate winning the election with a majority.
I hope and wish that your conclusion about the judiciary serving as guardrail proves correct. But I admit I’m not even so confident of that. Let’s see how SCOTUS rules, now, on some of the democracy-protecting cases it has agreed to consider.
Sadly, for me (and this is slightly off-topic), I despair that the confluence of the trends you cite in U.S. domestic politics are combining with virtually unthinkable outcomes in Ukraine and the Middle East to create a world much less likely to respond in the future to “American leadership” than earlier in the post-Cold War era. If Putin wins both Ukraine and the American presidency (through Trump, of course)… and Israel’s status as the Middle East’s sole functioning democracy is eroded beyond recognition… I really despair the coming decades.