From Trump to Indiana, authoritarianism creeps toward us
I come from a long line of agitators, but to the likely chagrin of my ancestors, I've never been one for protest: I'm lazy and soft and have always viewed the whole concept as almost entirely performative.
That's why I was surprised to find myself, on a blustery May Day, standing on the federal courthouse plaza in downtown Indianapolis alongside hundreds of other lawyers, reciting our oath together in a protest against the creeping authoritarianism of the second Trump term.
Not exactly the Battle of Seattle (it wasn't even 'officially' a 'protest'), but the point is, I'm worried enough to show up. And that worry stems from a question I keep hearing from people like me: center-left, educated, reasonably engaged white-collar professionals.
Why aren't more Americans alarmed?
Governance by whim
Yes, our polarized information ecosystem plays a major role. But I think there are other, less obvious reasons that help explain how we've become desensitized to the erosion of democratic norms.
First, we've normalized unilateral executive action. The steady rise of executive orders — from Barack Obama onward — has shifted expectations. Many folks cheered when presidents acted unilaterally for causes they support: protecting DACA recipients or canceling student debt. But, in a democracy, form sometimes matters more than function.
Briggs: Jim Banks would let Trump commit any crime you can imagine
You can't cheer executive power when it helps you and then act shocked when it's used for something far worse. Rule by pen creates an inevitable slide towards governance by whim.
Second, the anti-Trump movement became the resistance that cried fascism. I was horrified and embarrassed by much of Trump 1 and 2, but not every terrible policy is authoritarian. When every action is labeled fascist, people stop listening. To a regular person tuning in occasionally, the volume of alarm makes it easier to tune out entirely.
Third, there's a bad-faith argument that still resonates emotionally, which goes something like this. Many elite institutions have moved aggressively left in an authoritarian way: academia, media, corporate human resources, etc. And so, some argue, muscular state action is needed to rebalance them. It's a compelling narrative. It's also nonsense.
Indiana is choosing, punishing enemies
Protesters march Thursday, May 1, 2025, in a May Day rally at the Indiana Statehouse in opposition of the Trump administration.
Many important sectors have become reflexively censorious and illiberal in ways that are corrosive to civic life. But the state is categorically different, because it alone holds a monopoly on the sanctioned use of coercive violence. It was wrong when the Biden administration leaned on platforms to suppress COVID-19 'misinformation,' just as it's wrong when the Trump administration threatens to punish universities or law firms.
You don't have to dismiss legitimate complaints about ideological capture to say what, until recently, was obvious and agreed upon in this country: Illiberalism is worse when the state does it.
Whether out of information overload, polarization, or recent false alarms, the public's attention has dulled. But we need to snap out of it, because right now, we're facing two unmistakable warning signs of advancing authoritarianism.
First is increased weaponization of state power: using the levers of government to punish your ideological opponents. What recently seemed unthinkable is now commonplace.
More Jay Chaudhary: Mike Braun's property tax cut lost the plot
Trump 2.0 is punishing law firms that represent the 'wrong' clients. Universities face funding cuts and forced structural overhauls for perceived ideological offenses. Even private companies are threatened if they adopt the wrong stance on the wrong social issue, or state true facts about the impact of policies.
If Trump 1 was a horse in a hospital, then Trump 2 is more like a deranged health care executive demanding that all the hospital's doctors renounce the Hippocratic oath.
This is not limited to Washington. Here in Indiana, this playbook is already in use.
Attorney General Todd Rokita recently publicly posted the name and photo of a middle school teacher whose supposed offense was displaying a small rainbow sign that read 'All Are Welcome Here.' This was part of Rokita's campaign to promote his 'Parents' Bill of Rights,' which, apparently, includes state-sanctioned harassment of public school teachers.
This is the state actively choosing enemies and then using its platform to attempt to punish them.
Second, authoritarianism doesn't take root because of state action alone. It depends on public consent, or at least resignation, which often comes in the form of people trading freedom for a sense of safety.
Benjamin Franklin's overquoted line feels relevant: 'They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.'
Liberty is in danger
Protesters march Thursday, May 1, 2025, in a May Day rally at the Indiana Statehouse in opposition of the Trump administration.
In a sprawling, complicated democracy like ours, liberty flows from due process: the idea that those in power must always follow procedure and that even unpopular or marginalized people deserve the protection conferred by that process.
Once that principle is tossed aside, liberty itself is in serious danger. And nowhere is this erosion more visible than in the public conversation around immigration and President Trump's promises of mass deportation.
Democrats were far too late in acknowledging that the issue does have coherent internal logic and broad appeal: A nation must control its borders, and the rule of law must mean something. A lot, maybe most, of the blame lies with the Biden administration's complete neglect of the border issue.
But whatever the situation, the mechanics of 'mass deportation' should terrify any American that cares about liberty or freedom, regardless of any temporary gains in border security.
To deport millions, the government must first find them. That requires a vast new enforcement infrastructure: more surveillance, more detention centers and more federal agents in our neighborhoods. Employers and landlords become informants. Police become immigration officers. Traffic stops turn into document checks. Entire communities live in fear. Horror stories like the ones we've already seen will become routine.
More Jay Chaudhary: Make Indiana Healthy Again is about cost-cutting, not wellness
This is a complete transformation of the American way of life. You cannot build a 'show us your papers' society and expect it to remain contained to one group. This is a genie that can't be put back in the bottle.
People of good faith can disagree, vociferously, on political and social issues, but this is bigger than politics; this is nothing less than the bedrock of our democracy.
And that's why I got out of my comfort zone and went to the courthouse to stand with strangers and repeat an oath that I've taken before, but has never quite resonated like it does today.
Jay Chaudhary is the former director of the Indiana Division of Mental Health and Addiction and chair of the Indiana Behavioral Health Commission. He writes the Substack, Favorable Thriving Conditions.
This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: What is authoritarianism? It's Indiana punishing enemies. | Opinion

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
At odds over Trump's tax bill, some Senate Republicans turn on chamber's referee
By Bo Erickson and David Morgan WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Struggling to agree on a path forward for President Donald Trump's sweeping tax-cut and spending bill, some U.S. Senate Republicans on Thursday turned their anger on the referee charged with ensuring that lawmakers follow their own rules. That pushback came in response to Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough's ruling that some Medicaid policies Republicans are trying to include in the bill do not align with the special budget process the party is using to bypass the chamber's regular vote threshold, which requires 60 of the 100 senators to agree on legislation. "THE SENATE PARLIAMENTARIAN SHOULD BE FIRED ASAP,' Republican Senator Tommy Tuberville posted online, "This is a perfect example of why Americans hate THE SWAMP." Tuberville, a first-term senator who is running for Alabama governor, and Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas joined a vocal group of House of Representatives Republicans calling for the ouster of MacDonough, the first woman to hold this role since it was formalized in 1935. Theirs is a minority view. Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune for months has said his party will abide by the parliamentarian's guidance. MacDonough's office did not respond to a request for comment. This is not the first time members of the current Republican congressional majority have attempted to ignore Congress's nonpartisan arbiters. A growing number of Republican senators have ignored the cost estimates of the bill from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which estimated a price tag with interest costs around $3 trillion. The bill's hefty cost has exposed divides within the party, with some hardline deficit hawks demanding deep cuts to social programs including Medicaid to try to limit the bill's cost, and others warning that those cuts could imperil their narrow majorities in the 2026 midterm elections. MacDonough, a former lawyer, joined the Senate parliamentarian's office in 1999, serving as the head parliamentarian for the last 13 years. MacDonough's critics have dismissed her as "unelected," but it was Congress more than 50 years ago that established the parliamentarian as the referee for the special process known as "budget reconciliation" that bypasses the normal Senate filibuster rule. BYPASSING THE PARTISAN DIVIDE Republicans are pursuing this route -- which they relied on to pass Trump's tax cuts in 2017 during his first term -- because of their narrow majorities in both chambers. Democrats also used the process to pass legislation under President Joe Biden. Some Republicans suggested that MacDonough's ruling had political motives, noting that she was appointed by a Democratic majority leader in 2012. In this position, the parliamentarian is not weighing the merits of the policies, but rather if they fit into the budget reconciliation rules and precedent. MacDonough in 2021 blocked Democratic efforts to pass minimum wage and immigration provisions in the special budget process. This is not the first time this year the parliamentarian has weighed in on the Republicans' tax and budget bill, but the Medicaid and healthcare provisions that she advised on Thursday were seen as opportunities for Republicans to save money in the package that is forecast to add to the nation's $36.2 trillion in debt. Other Senate Republicans are standing by the process and MacDonough. 'I consider the parliamentarian to be a straight shooter. So I don't think there's anything more than it not meeting the standard,' Senator Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, told reporters. 'Nah, never overrule the parliamentarian," Senator John Kennedy, a Louisiana Republican, told reporters on Thursday. Senate Republicans are allowed to tweak these provisions to try to fit the specific budget process precedents and rules, or they could abandon these provisions entirely. Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon, the budget committee's top Democrat, pledged his party will continue "to make the case against every provision in this Big, Beautiful Betrayal of a bill that violates Senate rules and hurts families and workers." Firing a Senate parliamentarian is not without precedent. In 2001 during President George W. Bush's administration, Senate Republican leaders with an evenly divided chamber dismissed the parliamentarian after rulings on the party's budget and tax legislation regarding natural disaster funding.

Politico
27 minutes ago
- Politico
Former Supreme Court Justice Kennedy says ‘democracy is at risk'
Former Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy warned Thursday that acrimonious political discourse and threats to judges are eroding the ability of the United States to serve as an example of democracy worldwide. 'Many in the rest of the world look to the United States to see what democracy is, to see what democracy ought to be,' Kennedy said during an online forum about threats to the rule of law. 'If they see a hostile, fractious discourse, if they see a discourse that uses identity politics rather than to talk about issues, democracy is at risk. Freedom is at risk.' Kennedy, who stepped down from the court in 2018, avoided specifics during his 10-minute speech as part of a series of presentations by current and former judges. However, the Reagan appointee's remarks appeared to be triggered at least in part by strident attacks President Donald Trump has mounted against judges, including some whom he appointed during his first term, who have ruled against the administration's policies on immigration, firings of federal workers and his implementation of broad-based tariffs. In March, Trump attacked U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg as a 'radical left lunatic' after he attempted to block the administration from deporting alleged Venezuelan gang members under a wartime presidential power Trump invoked. Trump also called for Boasberg, an Obama appointee, to be impeached. Last month, Trump issued a social media post denouncing 'USA-hating' judges as 'monsters who want our country to go to hell.' The extreme rhetoric has come alongside a spike in threats against judges, although administration spokespeople have said the president opposes any threats and the Justice Department will prosecute them. 'Judges must have protection for themselves and their families,' Kennedy said. 'Our families are often included in threats.' Some other participants were more explicit in calling out Trump's salvos at the courts. While also not mentioning Trump by name, U.S. District Judge Esther Salas invoked the president's statements more directly, arguing they are akin to attacks on judges that have caused other countries to slide into authoritarianism. 'Judges are rogue. Sound familiar? Judges are corrupt. Sound familiar? Judges are monsters. … Judges hate America,' Salas said. 'We are seeing the spreading of disinformation coming from the top down.' Salas, whose son was killed and her husband wounded by a disgruntled litigant at their New Jersey home in 2020, said the U.S. Marshals Service has tracked more than 400 threats against judges so far this year. 'We're going to break records — and not in a good way,' said the judge, an Obama appointee. In his remarks Thursday, one day before his former Supreme Court colleagues are set to deliver their final rulings of the current term, Kennedy did offer some indirect praise for Trump. The retired justice repeatedly said he welcomed the ceasefire in fighting between Israel and Iran — a deal brokered by the White House. 'The world is celebrating what looks like, what we hope might be, peace for a period of time in the Middle East,' Kennedy said. 'Peace is what gives us the opportunity to make democracy stronger, to make freedom more attainable, to make freedom greater for ourselves and the rest of the world. We must always say no to tyranny and yes to truth.'


Fox News
28 minutes ago
- Fox News
Joint Chiefs chair spotlights 44 heroes who defended US base from Iran missile attack: 'Absolutely crushed it'
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine revealed details of the young skeleton crew who were left to defend Al Udeid Air Base as they faced an incoming barrage of Iranian missiles on Monday. "We believe that this is the largest single Patriot engagement in U.S. military history," Caine said, referring to the U.S. surface-to-air missile defense system. "We were joined in this engagement by the Qatar Patriot cruise." Caine said the 44 soldiers left on base after it was evacuated ranged in age from 21 to 28. They were left with only two Patriot systems to defend the base, which is a major headquarters in the Middle East and home to 10,000 deployed American soldiers. "Imagine you're that young first lieutenant. You're 25 or 26 years old, and you've been assigned as the tactical director inside the command and control element. You, at that age, are the sole person responsible to defend this base," Caine said. He did not say if any of the Iranian missiles got through the Patriot defense systems. The Qataris have claimed one missile penetrated air defenses. "There was a lot of metal flying around. And yet our U.S. air defenders had only seconds to make complex decisions with strategic impact." "Simply stated, they absolutely crushed it," he concluded. Iran launched a missile attack on the Qatari-based U.S. base in response to U.S. attacks on its nuclear facilities. President Donald Trump revealed that Iran had given the U.S. a heads-up on the attack, in an effort to symbolically hit back at the strikes without escalating the situation. Iran used short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles to attack Al-Udeid Air Base, but no casualties were reported. The Al-Udeid base serves as a hub for logistical operations for the U.S. mission to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria. It also hosts Central Command's forward headquarters, as well as its air forces and special operations in the region. It has also been used as a headquarters for British involvement in airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq.