Trump's Middle Finger to the U.S. Constitution: A 2025 Assault on American Freedoms

Mar 17, 2025

Introduction

Donald Trump is back in the White House, and if you thought his first term was a stress test for American democracy, 2025 is proving to be a full-blown constitutional crisis. From silencing the press and punishing protesters to weaponizing government agencies and shredding due process, his administration is not just bending the rules—it’s bulldozing them.

The First Amendment? Under siege. Equal protection? Selectively applied. The courts? Ignored and undermined. And yet, too many Americans don’t see the full picture—how rapidly the very foundations of our democracy are being dismantled. If you think this is just politics as usual, think again. Because what’s happening right now isn’t just a policy debate—it’s an existential fight for the soul of the country.

Free Press Under Fire

President Trump has escalated his longstanding war on the press, taking unprecedented steps to control media access and intimidate journalists. His White House has selectively barred critical outlets from press pools and briefings – notably Associated Press was kicked out of presidential events after refusing to alter its stylebook per Trump’s demands. A federal judge warned this smacks of unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination, but stopped short of forcing the administration to reinstate AP immediately.

At the same time, Trump’s appointees are weaponizing regulators against media companies. The chief broadcast regulator launched investigations into major networks ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR and PBS – conspicuously sparing the pro-Trump Fox network. Trump himself has filed a flurry of lawsuits against news and social media firms, pressuring some into costly settlements. Veteran reporters liken this “pincer movement” against the free press to the early Putin era, where only compliant journalists got access. The clear message, as one correspondent put it, is that any outlet asking tough questions can be next to lose access, This hostile climate, reinforced by Trump’s frequent verbal abuse of “fake news” reporters, chills the vital watchdog role of the press and limits the information everyday Americans receive.

Use AI to do a deep dive on all of the issue in my article: The stakes couldn’t be higher. What you know—and how you use it—matters more than ever. Our special Perplexity AI page is linked to this article. It’s your gateway to the truth, with no filters, no restrictions, just unfiltered access to the information that shapes our democracy. Your rights depend on knowledge. Ask. Dig deeper. Protect what’s yours.

Crackdown on Protest and Dissent

The Trump administration is also cracking down on protesters in ways that trample free speech and due process. In early 2025, federal agents arrested Mahmoud Khalil – a Palestinian graduate student at Columbia University – because of his role in campus protests against the Israel–Hamas war. Khalil, a legal U.S. resident with a pregnant American wife, was detained on vague accusations of having “led activities aligned to Hamas,” even though no law forbids mere “aligned” activism. Civil rights groups condemned the arrest as retaliation for protected political speech. Trump had promised to target foreign student protesters, and Khalil appears to be the first example – with officials bluntly vowing he is “only the beginning.”

The administration even moved to cancel $400 million in federal grants and contracts to Columbia University, punishing the school for campus demonstrations that Trump deems “antisemitic.” This is an alarming use of federal power to silence dissent: Trump is effectively threatening students (and universities) with legal jeopardy and financial ruin for protesting policies they disagree with. Americans exercising their First Amendment rights – whether marching in the streets or speaking out on campus – now face the specter of arrest or other retribution under dubious pretexts.

Abusing Wartime Powers and Undermining Due Process

Trump has gone so far as to invoke extraordinary wartime powers against groups he dislikes, a move that sidesteps constitutional due process protections. In March, he dusted off the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 – a centuries-old law historically used only during declared wars – to summarily arrest and deport hundreds of Venezuelan asylum-seekers accused of gang ties. Claiming the U.S. faces an “invasion” by a Venezuelan criminal group, Trump’s proclamation labeled any non-citizen allegedly affiliated as an “enemy” who can be “apprehended, restrained...and removed” without normal hearings. A federal judge blocked this sweeping order, noting the law applies only to wartime enemies “commensurate to war,” not to ordinary migrants.

But the Trump administration may have brazenly defied the court. It’s reported this morning that it deported over 200 people anyway – in secretive overnight flights to El Salvador – and then issued an extraordinary statement that a single judge has no authority” to stop the president’s actions. Legal experts, including yours truly, called this open defiance “beyond the pale” and perhaps the greatest threat to checks and balances since the Civil War. By unilaterally bypassing courts and suspending due process, Trump has tested the very limits of the Constitution. If such wartime powers can be misused in peacetime, no group’s rights are safe – and immigrants and minorities will be first in the crosshairs.

Weaponizing Government Agencies Against Critics

Trump’s 2025 agenda has also weaponized federal agencies against institutions he perceives as enemies – from universities and companies to law firms – often under the guise of “national security” or fighting “woke” policies. At colleges, the administration has leveraged federal funding to police campus ideology. Columbia University, for example, not only lost massive federal contracts after protest controversies, but is now under federal investigation for alleged “antisemitic” harassment on campus. The message to school administrators nationwide is clear: rein in student activism or risk losing support.

In the corporate world, Trump issued orders targeting diversity and inclusion (DEI) efforts. One Inauguration Day executive order instructed agencies to end so-called “illegal discrimination” in federal hiring – effectively rolling back diversity initiatives dating to the 1960s.

Another decree banned affirmative action by federal contractors and directed regulators to scrutinize publicly traded companies for any policies deemed “illegal” DEI. This has created huge uncertainty in the business community, as companies fear that routine diversity programs could put them on a government watchlist. Major employers from tech firms to retailers have already begun scaling back or rebranding their DEI initiatives in response.

Perhaps most striking is Trump’s retaliatory campaign against prominent law firms. In a highly unusual step, he singled out at least two firms – Perkins Coie and Covington & Burling – that had represented his political opponents, and ordered punitive action against them. A Trump executive order in February revoked security clearances for certain attorneys and sought to bar all Perkins Coie lawyers from federal buildings, a move experts say has no precedent. He further directed federal agencies to cancel contracts with these firms and even review contracts held by the firms’ clients.

The official pretext was that Perkins Coie’s diversity hiring practices “racially discriminate” (twisting the firm’s push for a diverse workforce into an alleged violation). But legal scholars note that this vendetta violates the First Amendment and due process, given its obvious motive of punishing firms for their past advocacy against Trump. Such use of government power to bully schools, businesses, and lawyers sends a chilling warning: any organization that displeases the president – whether for promoting inclusion or representing adversaries – can be targeted. This climate of fear and politicization threatens equal protection, as federal law is enforced not neutrally but as a weapon against perceived “enemies.” I wrote in detail about the Perkins Coie case here.

Undermining Judges and the Rule of Law

President Trump’s actions in 2025 have repeatedly undermined the judiciary and the separation of powers. He has shown an alarming willingness to ignore or delegitimize court rulings that constrain him. The clearest example came when his administration defied Judge James Boasberg’s order blocking the mass deportation of Venezuelan migrants. The White House press secretary openly declared the court had “no lawful basis” to intervene and that judges lack jurisdiction over the president’s immigration decisions.

Such statements attack the fundamental role of the courts in reviewing executive actions. Officials went so far as to say a judge in “a single city” cannot halt Trump’s directives – effectively claiming the president can override judicial authority at will. Trump himself, when asked about flouting the court, brushed off the legal concerns by insisting the deported individuals were “bad people.” This attitude conveys that court orders might not be respected if Trump disagrees, a dangerous precedent in our constitutional system.

Beyond ignoring judges’ rulings, Trump has also continued his habit of attacking judges personally. He routinely demeans judges who rule against him as partisan or illegitimate – a pattern seen in his past references to “Obama judges” or “so-called judges.” Now back in power, he has vowed to “hold accountable” officials involved in the investigations against him, raising fears he could retaliate against not only prosecutors but even judges who were part of those cases. This rhetoric erodes public faith that courts can operate free from political retribution.

Trump is also stripping away internal checks within the executive branch that safeguard legality and ethics. He has fired multiple agency Inspectors General and watchdog officials who are tasked with exposing government misconduct. At the Pentagon, Trump’s Defense Secretary removed several senior military lawyers deemed potential “roadblocks” to White House directives. By purging independent oversight and concentrating loyalty, the administration makes it harder for whistleblowers or internal critics to speak up – undermining accountability from within.

These moves collectively weaken the rule of law. When a president ignores court orders, attacks judges’ integrity, and eliminates independent oversight, no American’s rights are truly secure. The balances that prevent abuse of power are being whittled away, risking a government where might makes right and constitutional limits are ignored.

Rolling Back LGBTQ+ Rights

In 2025 the Trump administration launched a sweeping assault on LGBTQ+ rights – particularly targeting transgender Americans – through executive actions and legal maneuvers. Within hours of taking office in January, Trump signed a “stunningly broad” executive order nullifying many protections for transgender people.

This order directs the federal government to recognize only two sexes, male and female, assigned at birth, erasing recognition of transgender and nonbinary identities across all agencies. In effect, the government will no longer acknowledge gender transitions, meaning federal IDs like passports must reflect birth sex, and policies must be rolled back to treat everyone by their sex at birth. Trump’s order also revoked Biden-era rules that had prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in education, housing, healthcare and other areas. It even banned transgender individuals from serving openly in the military once again.

On the health front, the administration is leveraging federal funding to curtail LGBTQ+ support services. Trump directed agencies to withhold funds from any programs that “promote gender ideology,” a vague mandate used to chill everything from transgender-inclusive school curricula to hospital treatments.

For example, hospitals fear losing Medicare and Medicaid dollars if they continue providing gender-affirming care or even use trans patients’ chosen names. Indeed, reports emerged of some medical centers immediately reverting to a patient’s birth name (or “deadname”) in records and correspondence, out of fear of Trump’s new rules. The administration also ordered that transgender people in federal custody (like prisons or immigration detention) be housed according to birth sex and denied gender-affirming healthcare.

These measures have sparked at least ten lawsuits so far by LGBTQ+ advocates and civil rights groups. Federal judges in multiple states have shown skepticism, with four executive orders already under temporary injunctions for likely being unconstitutional. In one case, a judge called the administration’s policy of pulling funds from trans-supportive programs an overreach and put it on hold.

Transgender Americans especially feel they are being “removed from public life” – unable to obtain accurate IDs, afraid to seek healthcare or speak out, and even seeing references to their history erased from government websites and documents. For families with LGBTQ+ members, these policy shifts have created deep uncertainty about whether their loved ones’ rights will be protected. Decades of progress toward inclusion are being reversed by executive fiat, making LGBTQ+ citizens unequal in the eyes of their own government.

Threats to Voting Rights: The SAVE Act

Among the most alarming moves in 2025 is a push to restrict Americans’ voting rights under the misleadingly named Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act. Backed by Trump and Republicans in Congress, the SAVE Act purports to crack down on non-citizens voting – something that is already illegal in all federal elections – but its actual impact would be to make registering to vote far harder for millions of eligible citizens.

The bill would require every American to show proof of citizenship in person when registering or updating voter registration. In practice, this means presenting a passport, birth certificate, or similar document – a burden that sounds simple, but isn’t for many. An estimated 21 million voting-age Americans do not have citizenship documents readily available. Women are particularly at risk: roughly 69 million American women (and 4 million men) have a different last name than the one on their birth certificate, often due to marriage. These voters could be forced to dig up additional paperwork to prove a name change or risk being turned away.

Voting rights experts warn the SAVE Act would create new barriers especially for married women, transgender individuals, and others who have changed their legal names, as well as for poor, rural, and older voters less likely to have such papers on hand. I wrote a detailed piece about the harms of the SAVE Act titled, The SAVE Act’s War on Women Voters: A Fake Fix for Non-Existent Fraud That Silences Millions.

In effect, this law could disenfranchise millions of law-abiding Americans. Similar proof-of-citizenship requirements were tried in Kansas and Arizona in the past decade – and courts struck them down as unconstitutional for precisely disenfranchising eligible voters. Despite this, the House has prioritized the SAVE Act, and Trump has signaled strong support, framing it as a “popular” election integrity measure.

Look, the fact of the matter is that there is no evidence of widespread non-citizen voting so the SAVE Act is a solution in search of a problem – one that would undermine women’s equal right to vote and roll back decades of progress since the Voting Rights Act. Everyday Americans who have voted for years could suddenly find themselves forced to navigate bureaucratic hurdles to exercise their most fundamental democratic right.

Attacking Birthright Citizenship

Trump is even challenging one of the Constitution’s core protections of equal rights: birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. In 2025 he is attempting to end the guarantee that anyone born on U.S. soil is automatically a citizen – a principle in place since 1868.

On his first day back in office, Trump signed an executive order declaring that babies born in America to non-citizens (including undocumented immigrants and those on temporary visas) will no longer be granted U.S. citizenship by birth. This defies the clear text of the 14th Amendment, which states “All persons born…in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” Legal challenges were immediate, and so far the courts have sided with the Constitution.

A federal judge in Washington swiftly called Trump’s order “blatantly unconstitutional” and blocked it from taking effect, reaffirming that birthright citizenship is a “fundamental constitutional right.” Judges in Maryland and Massachusetts issued similar injunctions, with one court noting that no judiciary has ever accepted Trump’s narrow interpretation of the 14th Amendment.

The Trump administration, however, is fighting back in court and has petitioned the Supreme Court to intervene. In filings to the high court, Trump’s lawyers astonishingly argued that nationwide injunctions protecting birthright citizenship “transgress” the courts’ powers and urged that the policy be allowed to proceed at least in part.

This marks the first time a U.S. president has directly tried to curtail the citizenship rights of those born in America, a move with profound implications. If upheld, it would create a hereditary underclass of U.S.-born people denied citizenship because of who their parents are – a stark violation of equal protection principles. For families, this could mean American-born children split from their status as citizens, and for businesses and communities, a confusing patchwork of who is “really” American. The attempt to gut birthright citizenship is still tied up in court battles, but the mere effort undermines the constitutional promise of equality for all born on American soil.

The Urgent Crossroads

From silencing the press and protesters, to targeting immigrants and minorities, to eroding voting rights and constitutional guarantees, the pattern is unmistakable: the Trump administration in 2025 is systematically undercutting the equal rights and freedoms that Americans often take for granted. These developments are not normal policy debates – they are direct challenges to the rule of law and the fundamental fairness of our society.

Everyday Americans, whether liberal or conservative, should understand that when due process is ignored for some, everyone’s liberties are jeopardized. A business owner might cheer deregulation, only to later find their company under investigation for displeasing those in power. A parent might support “law and order,” only to find their protesting teenager branded a threat.

Our democracy relies on a free press, an independent judiciary, equal protection under the law, and the fundamental principle that no one— not even the president— is above the law. Every one of these pillars is under siege. Families, business owners, and everyday Americans must stay informed and engaged, because the rights we surrender today will be far harder to reclaim tomorrow. The alarm bells are ringing, and the survival of American democracy may depend on how we respond to these escalating threats.

But hey, at least he lowered the price of eggs— oh wait.

Mitch Jackson, Esq. | links