“The very definition of tyranny”: Donald Trump’s attempted coup edit

James Madison somberly noted in Federalist Paper No. 47 that “The accumulation of all powers—legislative, executive, and judiciary—into the same hands…may justly be described as the very definition of tyranny.” Madison’s words are more relevant than ever given Donald J. Trump’s actions since beginning his second presidential term. One should not dismiss as hyperbole a recent cover of The Economist portraying Trump wearing a crown and headlined “The Would-Be King.”

America was repeatedly warned of the risk of a coup d’état if Trump were to regain power.[1] Trump’s first presidency was an alarming display of authoritarianism, cruelty, and corruption. The risks of his re-election were clear, compounded by his prescient proclamation that he intended to seize dictatorial power and pursue retribution on the first day of his second term. However, despite anticipating the danger of his re-election, which in fact was achieved by a very close margin, the reality has been far more disturbing and exhausting than expected. Yet the flood of authoritarian measures—many, illegal or unconstitutional; others, while legal, nonetheless constitute both an assault on political on political norms of restraint and on progressive political, economic, and social reforms adopted since the New Deal—should not obscure their central aim: “the accumulation of all powers” that is, an attempted coup d’état to undermine American democracy.

Elements of the crisis

Trump’s appointments to cabinet and other key executive positions are monumentally unqualified, incompetent, inexperienced, and immoral. They share one essential characteristic: unquestioning fealty to the president, including support of his fraudulent claim that the 2020 election was stolen and his defense of the attempted insurrection of the Capitol on January 6th, 2021. Their support for Trump’s corrupt actions and lies foreshadows a probable willingness to comply with future illegitimate requests.

Weakening or dismantling federal agencies, including USAID, Environmental Protection Agency, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Health and Human Services, and Education Department. These agencies provide vital public services mandated by Congress. The result will cause incalculable damage to American society.

Purging nonpartisan civil servants as well as civilian and military officers and replacing them with Trump loyalists. Two especially ominous instances are the dismissal of nonpartisan career lawyers and prosecutors, some of whom were assigned to investigate and prosecute Trump and his allies in the past; and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (who typically serves for a fixed term) as well as five other high-ranking military officers. Their replacements are more likely to comply with Trump’s illegitimate orders.

Shrinking the federal bureaucracy by layoffs that violate civil service protections as well as by offering buyouts, without congressional authorization of funds, to over two million federal career officials.

Directing all federal civil servants to submit weekly reports on their work. If their supervisors determine that it does not align with the administration’s agenda, the officials deemed disloyal may be dismissed. This project aims to reshape the career civil service into a partisan weapon at the president’s disposal

Granting the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) unprecedented control over regulatory commissions and agencies. Even more broadly, a presidential directive has directed the OMB “to establish performance standards and management objectives” for all federal agencies (including those granted autonomy by Congress) and to shape their budgets “as necessary and appropriate to advance the President’s policies and priorities.” If courts do not block this arguably illegal project, it would provide the president undivided control of the bureaucracy consistent with a far-right fringe doctrine known as the unitary executive theory.

Impounding expenditures of funds appropriated by Congress both on a widespread basis and especially programs to promote a green transition, environmental protection, labor union organizing, and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) hiring.

Marginalizing Congress. Many of the president’s agenda involves by-passing Congress.

Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

To help Trump pursue his far-reaching agenda, he created the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) without congressional authorization or funding. Its ostensible purpose is to eliminate governmental waste, fraud, and abuse; and modernize the executive.[2] The real mission is to serve as Trump’s personal instrument. By appointing Elon Musk to direct DOGE, the world’s richest person became among America’s most powerful public officials.[3]

A constitutional scholar has observed that DOGE operates as “a kind of shadow executive branch … exercising power outside of the channels of the Constitution and the statutes that Congress authorized.”[4] DOGE has embedded teams of computer software engineers—who often lack adequate training or security clearance--in twenty federal agencies. They have marginalized experienced officials and disrupted the provision of agency services, including airport safety, disaster management, and public health.[5] Under the guise of eliminating malfeasance, DOGE is helping Trump politicize and centralize control over the bureaucracy, reduce the scope of the state, slash the social safety net, and provide the president and Musk with vast opportunities for personal enrichment. (Both men have immense conflicts of interest since they simultaneously direct the government while continuing to participate in far-flung private business pursuits.)

The aspect of Doge’s work posing the greatest threat to American democracy involves the agency’s gaining access to and control over the software control systems, data, transactions, payments, and records systems. These systems contain highly confidential information concerning government operations and intimate aspects of Americans’ lives. They direct payments of $6 trillion annually. Access to the systems has always been strictly limited; authority to alter their operating programs has been even more restricted. This technological architecture was designed to prevent any one person or agency from accessing and controlling multiple systems, thereby centralizing control over them. The DOGE team has violated these safeguards with virtually no oversight, limits, or accountability. The result potentially provides the president with an immensely powerful instrument that can potentially be wielded for partisan, authoritarian, and corrupt purposes.

A security specialist suggests that the project involves “a coordinated strategy for control of America’s money and economic policy, effectively placing the United States in entirely private hands.”[6] In an ironic case of poetic justice, two scholars suggest that DOGE actions emulate the U.S. government’s playbook after 9/11 for centralizing control over the technological infrastructure of the international financial system, involving centralized control of the SWIFT and dollar clearing system. “The U.S. identified key choke points that allowed it to weaponize the world’s payment, information, and physical infrastructure to achieve its ends. Musk’s DOGE is weaponizing the U.S. government’s payment, information, and physical infrastructure in highly similar ways.”[7]

The bigger picture

Trump’s policies seek to deploy consolidated control of the executive to undermine democratic and economic reforms since the New Deal and replace them with a project that denies the harm caused by racism, sexism, xenophobia, and Christian nationalism, and opposes the welfare state because it presumably promotes dependence. This project has a name: Make America Great Again (MAGA). A partial list of actions it inspires includes:

Budget proposals to cut trillions of dollars for domestic programs involving environmental protection, scientific research, disaster relief, as well as public health, retirement, and food assistance programs to low-income Americans, and coupled with tax cuts that will primarily benefit wealthy taxpayers.

Terminating most of USAID’s more than 6,000 grants, loans, and operation, of programs for medical care, prevention, and research throughout the world. “Global health experts said the effects of the cuts will be disastrous….”[8]

Trump’s pardon on day one of 1,500 participants in the January 6th insurrection, including 600 convicted of violent crimes. The New York Times editorially observed that the pardons “make a mockery of [the] justice system….” They signify “that the rioters did nothing wrong, that violence is a perfectly legitimate form of political expression….”[9]

Directing retribution against opponents. Trump ordered the removal of Secret Service protection for officials in his first administration whom he considers disloyal, including a former secretary of State, national security advisor, and distinguished public health officer Anthony Fauci. Trump’s public condemnation of them has provoked death threats by his followers.

Promoting false historical narratives, including claims that the 2020 election was stolen, civilian and military officers of color, and DOGE has discovered vast amounts of fraud.

Eliminating Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in government agencies, and dismissing career officials who administer these programs. It has issued directives targeting trans adults and youth. The Department Education has threatened to withhold funds from colleges and universities that refuse to eliminate DEI programs and courses teaching about race and gender in a manner that the administration opposes.

Resistance within the State

After several weeks in which Trump’s attempted coup encountered little resistance, opposition has developed and will doubtless widen as the impact of the administration’s policies increases. This section describes the opposition to the to the project within the state and Republican Party; space precludes analyzing opposition within civil society.

Executive Branch

Seven Justice Department prosecutors resigned rather than support Trump’s request to drop corruption charges against NYC Mayor Eric Adams. One stated that complying would set “a breathtaking and dangerous precedent.”

The acting commissioner of Social Security resigned after DOGE sought access to confidential citizen data.

Public-sector unions and civil servants have filed lawsuits challenging the legality of dismissals.

A conflict at the highest level of the administration occurred when the Office of Personnel Management, a DOGE ally, ordered all federal employees to submit reports on their work or face dismissal. Trump’s secretaries of Justice, State, and Defense publicly opposed the directive and ordered employees to ignore it. However, it was subsequently revised, and reissued in an extended form.

Congress

The Republican Party’s narrow majority in both houses of Congress enables it to control the congressional agenda. Since Trump has achieved a firm grip on the party, GOP leaders have abdicated Congress’ constitutionally mandated authority of policymaking, financial responsibility, and executive oversight. However, a growing public backlash over proposed cuts to popular public health and retirement programs prompted a handful of Republican legislators to express concern. Fractures within the GOP’s caucus in both houses are sure to grow.

Judiciary

Given Congress’ passivity, the judiciary has emerged as the major source of governmental opposition to Trump’s over-reach.[10] Over eighty federal lawsuits have been filed challenging the administration actions. Many have been at least partially successful, including challenges to ending birthright citizenship, extending administration control over independent regulatory agencies, impounding congressionally appropriated funds, reducing federal research funding, authorizing DOGE’s access to computer systems, dismissing civil servants and executives, and the U.S.’ withdrawal from the World Health Organization. However, most judicial blocks are temporary, and harm has usually already occurred. An ominous possibility occurred when Trump quoted Napoleon’s declaration that “He who saves the country does not violate any law.” Vice President JD Vance concurred by claiming that “judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”

Civil Society

In the first weeks of Trump’s second mandate, the predominant reaction of those opposing Trump was shock, both at his return to power and at the tsunami of measures that were immediately initiated. However, Trump was elected by a narrow margin, and he was never a popular president. Compared to other presidents within the past century, his poll standing was already low when he took office last January--second only to one other president entering office: Donald Trump in 2017! After initial shock, public opposition has become increasingly vocal and is likely to mushroom as tariff-propelled price rises, public-sector layoffs, and spending cuts become palpable.

What explains the vulnerability of American democracy? The perfect storm following January 20

No one factor can explain the present crisis, a perfect storm—arguably unprecedented in American history—produced by the interaction of multiple factors.

The first is plutocratic populism.[11] Long before January 20, 2025, and well prior to January 20, 2017, a consolidation and concentration of immense wealth and political power were occurring that increased economic inequality and produced hardship for large proportion of Americans. The shift was a product of technological changes, neoliberal globalization policies, decline of organized labor, and a conservative drift by the Democratic Party. These changes produced social and economic disruptions that Trump (assisted by the Republican Party) exploited to champion a plutocratic populist platform purporting to MAGA. Ironically, his proposed solution to the crisis is exacerbating it.

The Constitution is an ancient document approaching its 250th anniversary. Inevitably, it is not constructed to contain modern-day threats; and it contains ambiguities and loopholes ripe for a would-be tyrant to exploit. Moreover, complying with the spirit, not simply the letter of the Constitution, requires involves respecting norms of restraint.

It is obvious but warrants highlighting that, without Donald Trump, there would be no coup. He is probably the least qualified and most unscrupulous president in American history Throughout his life, Donald Trump has brilliantly deployed unscrupulous methods single-mindedly to pursue wealth and power. He was given an important boost in his second term by a Supreme Court ruling in 2023 declaring that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution when acting in connection with their core functions.

Trump’s first-term stumbles and failed coup taught him the importance of preparing a detailed plan ready for implementation immediately on entering the White House. He ws provided with one thanks to the Heritage Foundation’s 900-page “Project 2025.” Its hundreds of reform proposals have provided an invaluable roadmap guiding his actions since resuming office.

Another lesson that Trump learned from his first-term failure is the need to appoint sycophants to high positions. The rise of competitive authoritarianism elsewhere demonstrates that a dictator’s takeover requires the complicity of influential allies.[12] Trump’s appointment of Elon Musk deserves special mention in this regard: a ruthless oligarch who wields a uniquely powerful position in the Trump administration.

A final factor facilitating the current coup attempt is Trump’s iron-fisted control of the Republican Party and its victory in the 2024 congressional elections. Congress’ support for Trump’s radical agenda has smoothed his path, as is Congress’ willingness to abdicate its role in shaping and funding federal policies and programs as well as ensuring that the president fulfills his constitutional obligation to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Conclusion

Trump was unpopular during his first term and at the start of the second. His poll ratings have dropped further in the last month. Yet this situation, and the narrow mandate that he and the GOP received by their narrow victories in 2024, have not deterred the president from attempting to dismantle democratic institutions as well as reshape America’s economy, and culture. The immense damage wrought in the last two months would be difficult to undo even if strong judicial pushback, future GOP electoral defeats, and widespread popular resistance were to occur: it is far easier to destroy than create or restore. However, the attempted coup is probably far from over. In fact, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, not only is the present moment not the beginning of the end; it is far from being the end of the beginning.

[1] Among many, see Jonathan Swan et al, “Trump and Allies Forge Plans to Increase Presidential Power in 2025,” The New York Times, July 18, 2023; and Mark Kesselman, “Le Crepuscule de la Democratie Americaine,” Telos, January 29, 2024.

[2] Charlie Warzel, “The ‘Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly’ of the United States Government,” The Atlantic, February 3, 2025.

[3] Trump initially appointed Musk as director but then denied that he was director--doubtless as an attempt to obscure the mindboggling conflicts of interest involved in Musk’s directing an agency with immense influence over the awarding of billions of dollars in contracts to Musk’s far -flung businesses

[4] Quoted in Jeff Stein et al, “U.S. governmental officials privately warn Musk’s blitz appears illegal,” The Washington Post, February 4, 2025.

[5] In several cases, agencies have scrambled to rehire laid-off employees after realizing the damage caused by their dismissal. Examples include the agency responsible for safeguarding nuclear weapons, and at he Department of Agriculture, where employees engaged in combatting bird flu were dismissed just when the number of cases soared.

[6] Allison Stanger, “Efficiency or empire? How Elon Musk’s hostile takeover could end government as we know it,” The Conversation, February 7, 2025.

[7] Henry Farrell and Abraham L. Newman, “Elon Musk Weaponizes the Government,” Lawfare, February 5, 2025.

[8] Nathaniel Weixel, The Hill, March 2, 2025.

[9] The New York Times, January 21, 2025.

[10] Francesca Paris and Charlie Savage, “Is That Legal? A Guide to Trump’s Moves So Far,” The New York Times, February 22, 2025; and Justin Jouvenal and Ann E. Marimow, “Tracking Trump’s wins and losses in court cases over his executive authority,” The Washington Post, February 24, 2025.

[11] A concept suggested by Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson, Let Them Eat Tweets. New York: Liveright, 2020.

[12] Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way, “The Path to American Authoritarianism: What Comes After Democratic Breakdown,” Foreign Affairs, March/April 2025.