logo
Trump disdains conservatism. His governing philosophy is absolute power

Trump disdains conservatism. His governing philosophy is absolute power

The Guardian27-04-2025

Donald Trump issued his declaration of war against his 'enemies within' at the Department of Justice on 14 March. Thus the president launched a constitutional crisis that encompasses not just a group of migrants snatched without due process and transported against federal court orders to a foreign prison, but a wholesale assault on virtually every major institution of American society.
'We will expel the rogue actors and corrupt forces from our government. We will expose, and very much expose, their egregious crimes and severe misconduct,' he pledged. 'It's going to be legendary.'
Trump's speech condensed his mission to its despotic essence. While he distilled his contempt, Trump also marked his disdain for the traditional conservatism of limited government, respect for the law and liberty. He defined his project, built on his executive orders as substitutes for the law, to crown himself with unrestrained powers to intimidate, threaten and even kidnap. His political philosophy is a ruthless quest for absolute power.
Trump hailed his appointees for being 'so tough' – the enthusiastically compliant attorney general, Pam Bondi, and the irrepressible flunky FBI director, Kash Patel. He attacked lawyers whose firms he would issue executive orders against to eviscerate their work – 'really, really bad people'. He claimed Joe Biden and the former attorney general Merrick Garland 'tried to turn America into a corrupt communist and third world country'. And he described 'people that come into our country' as 'stone cold killers. These are killers like – they make our killers look nice by comparison. They make our killers look nice. These are rough, tough people with the tattoos all over their face.' Trump's accusations are invariably projections of his own malice that he manufactures into politically pliable paranoia.
No staff attorneys within the department were invited to the speech, as people at the justice department told me. The senior lawyers from the Public Integrity Section had already resigned when Trump attempted to coerce them to participate in dropping the prosecution of New York City's mayor, Eric Adams, for corruption in exchange for his support of Trump's coming roundup and deportation of migrants. After Trump, a convicted felon, concluded by comparing himself to Al Capone, the mafia boss convicted of tax evasion – 'the great Alphonse Capone, legendary Scarface, was attacked only a tiny fraction of what Trump was attacked' – Trump's theme song from his political rallies, YMCA, blared out of the loudspeakers in the department auditorium.
The next day, Trump announced his executive order citing the Alien Enemies Act of 1789, a wartime measure, to incarcerate members of the Tren de Aragua gang he asserted were coordinating with the Maduro government of Venezuela to commit 'brutal crimes, including murders, kidnappings, extortions, and human, drug, and weapons trafficking'. (On 20 March, the New York Times reported: 'The intelligence community assessment concluded that the gang, Tren de Aragua, was not directed by Venezuela's government or committing crimes in the United States on its orders, according to the officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity.')
The 238 men abducted were taken without any due process to a maximum security prison operated by the Salvadoran strongman Nayib Bukele, who calls himself 'the coolest dictator' and whose government is being paid at least $6m in an arrangement with the Trump administration.
In a hearing on 24 March before the US court of appeals for the DC circuit, Judge Patricia Millett, criticizing the absence of due process, said: 'Nazis got better treatment under the Alien Enemies Act.' She asked the deputy assistant attorney general, Drew Ensign, arguing the administration's case: 'What's factually wrong about what I said?'
'Well, your Honor, we certainly dispute the Nazi analogy,' he replied.
Trump's assertion of emergency power under the Alien Enemies Act is more than a bit analogous to the ideas of Carl Schmitt, the chief legal scholar and apologist of the Nazi regime, 'Crown Jurist of the Third Reich'. The falsity, according to the intelligence community, of Trump's claim about the men underlines the analogy of Trump's argument to Schmitt's. 'Authority, not truth, produces law,' Schmitt wrote. 'Sovereign is he who decides on invocation of the state of emergency.' And then: 'Der Ausnahmefall offenbart das Wesen der staatlichen Autorität am klarsten' – 'The State of Emergency reveals most clearly the essence of the authority of the state … The exception is thus far more important that the ordinary rule. The normal state of affairs shows nothing; the emergency shows everything; it confirms not only the rule, rather the rule derives strictly from the emergency.'
The ACLU filed a lawsuit on 15 March before chief judge James Boasberg of the US district court of the District of Columbia to halt the flight to El Salvador. The judge issued an order for the planes to return to the US, but the Trump administration defied it.
Trump's defiance has set in motion a flurry of legal challenges and court cases heard in district courts and circuit courts of appeals, as well as the supreme court. On 7 April, the court ruled that the detainees had the right to due process, which they were denied. On 11 April, the justices unanimously ordered the administration to facilitate the return of one wrongly taken individual, Kilmar Ábrego García, a legal resident of Maryland who was identified by his family and had no criminal record. On 19 April, the court temporarily blocked a new round of deportations under the Alien Enemies Act.
CBS's 60 Minutes reported: 'We could not find criminal records for 75% of the Venezuelans.' Bloomberg News reported that about 90% had no criminal records.
On 14 April, Trump welcomed Bukele to the White House. Trump has turned the Oval Office into his small stage with cabinet secretaries and staff seated on the couches as his chorus. Bukele was dressed in black casual wear, but not admonished by JD Vance as he had criticized Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy for supposedly showing disrespect to Trump by not appearing in a suit and tie.
Trump and Bukele played the scene as a buddy movie, kidding each other, but not kidding, about repression. 'Mr President,' said Bukele, 'you have 350 million people to liberate. But to liberate 350 million people, you have to imprison some. That's the way it works, right?'
'The homegrowns are next, the homegrowns,' said Trump. 'You've got to build about five more places.'
'Yeah, we got the space,' Bukele said.
When the question of Ábrego García was raised by a reporter, Bondi said: 'That's not up to us,' and that it was 'up to El Salvador'.
'Well, I'm – supposed you're not suggesting that I smuggle a terrorist in the United States, right?' Bukele replied. Trump reassured him: 'It's only CNN.' Bukele called the question 'preposterous'.
'Well, they'd love to have a criminal released into our country,' said Trump. 'These are sick people. Marco, do you have something to say about that?' It was another test of the secretary of state's sycophancy. Marco Rubio rose to the occasion. 'No court in the United States has a right to conduct a foreign policy of the United States,' he said. 'It's that simple. End of story.'
Standing behind Rubio, Trump's most influential aide and the architect of his immigration policy, Stephen Miller, chimed in: 'To Marco's Point, the supreme court said exactly what Marco said. That no court has the authority to compel the foreign policy function in the United States. We won a case 9-0. And people like CNN are portraying it as a loss, as usual, because they want foreign terrorists in the country who kidnap women and children.'
But a reporter attempted to point out that the court had in fact ruled it was illegal to deprive the captives of due process. 'Well, it's illegal to, so I just wanted some clarity on it,' he asked. Trump jumped in: 'And that's why nobody watches you anymore. You have no credibility.'
On 17 April, the day the supreme court ruled on Ábrego García, on Trump said, 'I'm not involved in it,' though he had signed the executive order that authorized his kidnapping. Trump was reverting to the tactic of denial, however patently ludicrous, that he had been schooled in originally by Roy Cohn, the Republican power broker and mafia lawyer who had been his private attorney. The Trump administration continues to claim it has no control over the captives in the Salvadorian prison and they cannot be returned.
Trump's disavowal of responsibility made the homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem's, visit to the prison to tape a video on 26 March problematic on several levels. If Trump has no control, then how was Noem allowed the run of the place? If the prisoners were combatants under the Alien Enemies Act, then their status made her appearance a violation of the Geneva convention's Article 1 that outlaws 'outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment', and Article 13 that prohibits 'acts of violence or intimidation' and 'insults and public curiosity' – that is, using prisoners for propaganda purposes.
If Schmitt's argument is not Trump's argument, the difference has certainly not confused the judges handling the cases. Boasberg ruled that the Trump administration had acted with 'willful disregard' for his order and, while contempt proceedings were paused, threatened to appoint a special prosecutor if the Department of Justice declines to do so.
The Maryland federal judge Paula Xinis, who ordered the administration to return Ábrego García, said on 15 April she had seen no evidence of progress. She ruled on 22 April that such stonewalling 'reflects a willful and bad faith refusal to comply with discovery obligations … That ends now.'
She also stated: 'Defendants must supplement their answer to include all individuals involved as requested in this interrogatory.' That discovery process might range into stranger precincts of Maga depths than imagined. The New Yorker reported on 'a Maga salon' at a tech billionaire's Washington residence to which a Republican lobbyist, Andrew Beck, brought Trace Meyer, self-described as the 'Babe Ruth of bitcoin', where they discussed with state department staffers the 'work-in-progress plan' for abducting migrants to El Salvador. The officials had reached 'an impasse in the negotiations. Meyer, through his crypto connections, was able to help reopen the conversation.' Add to the discovery list: Beck, Meyer and the state department officials.
In denying the Trump administration's motion for a halt in the Xinis ruling, Judge J Harvie Wilkinson III, of the court of appeals for the fourth circuit, issued a thunderous opinion on 17 April, marking a historic break between principled conservatism and Trump's regime. Wilkinson is an eminent conservative figure within the judiciary, of an old Virginia family, a clerk to Justice Lewis Powell, and a Ronald Reagan appointee revered in the Federalist Society.
'The government,' Wilkinson wrote, 'is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.'
Wilkinson concluded with a siren call about Trump's threat. 'If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home? And what assurance shall there be that the Executive will not train its broad discretionary powers upon its political enemies? The threat, even if not the actuality, would always be present, and the Executive's obligation to 'take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed' would lose its meaning.'
Wilkinson has defined the stark conflict headed toward a unstoppable collision. Against Trump's appropriation of Schmitt's authoritarian logic, the conservative jurist has thrown down the gauntlet of American constitutional law. Trump's disdain for that sort of conservatism moves the cases again and again toward the conservative majority of the supreme court, which must decide its allegiance, either like Wilkinson, to the constitution, or instead to Trump's untrammeled power that would reduce the court itself to a cipher.
Sidney Blumenthal, a former senior adviser to President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, has published three books of a projected five-volume political life of Abraham Lincoln: A Self-Made Man, Wrestling With His Angel and All the Powers of Earth

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Defense rests case in second trial of Karen Read for Boston police officer boyfriend's death
Defense rests case in second trial of Karen Read for Boston police officer boyfriend's death

The Independent

time28 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Defense rests case in second trial of Karen Read for Boston police officer boyfriend's death

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.

'There is no Plan B': Republicans make a daring bet on the debt limit
'There is no Plan B': Republicans make a daring bet on the debt limit

NBC News

timean hour ago

  • NBC News

'There is no Plan B': Republicans make a daring bet on the debt limit

WASHINGTON — As Republicans barrel toward a critical deadline this summer to lift the debt ceiling, they say there's no 'Plan B' to avert an economically disastrous default if they fail to pass the massive bill for President Donald Trump's agenda in time. Congressional Republicans are eyeing increasing the debt limit by $4 trillion to $5 trillion so the government can keep borrowing to meet the country's obligations. It's part of their broader domestic policy package, which the Senate needs to pass before it can go back through the House and ultimately to Trump's desk for his signature. And the GOP only has three votes to spare in both chambers. 'There is no Plan B,' Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said Tuesday when asked by NBC News if he has a backup plan for the debt limit. 'It's Plan A. We have to get it done. Failure is not an option.' It's a risky gamble by GOP leaders, who are putting all their chips on passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act by the debt ceiling deadline. 'We're going to get reconciliation done,' Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said when asked what the party's fallback plan is on the debt ceiling. (Reconciliation refers to the budget process Republicans are using to pass their bill, which allows them to bypass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate and cut Democrats out of the process.) The Treasury Department has urged Congress to raise the debt ceiling "by mid-July" to safely avoid default. The Congressional Budget Office projected this week that the deadline may be later, 'between mid-August and the end of September,' although that won't be official unless the Treasury Department agrees. If Republicans fail to pass their sprawling bill in time, they would need to negotiate with Democrats to pass a standalone debt limit extension through the 60-vote process in the Se nate. But there have been no negotiations between party leaders on that front, according to Republican and Democratic aides with knowledge of the dynamics. One GOP aide said the party is 'full steam ahead on Plan A' and suggested there may still be time to consider a fallback if they absolutely need to. Some Republicans say it's a deliberate tactic to drive up the urgency of passing their filibuster-proof bill. 'We should be set an expectation that we're getting this done in July, and it includes the debt ceiling,' said Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. 'I think the minute you start talking about a backup plan, you're going to have a backup plan.' If Republican leaders eventually decide they want to cut a bipartisan deal on the debt ceiling, it's unclear what — if anything — Democrats would demand. Some, like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, of Massachusetts, and Rep. Brendan Boyle, of Pennsylvania., have insisted on abolishing the debt limit entirely in order to prevent the full faith and credit of the United States from being used as leverage in policy negotiations. That's an idea Trump recently endorsed. 'I am very pleased to announce that, after all of these years, I agree with Senator Elizabeth Warren on SOMETHING,' Trump wrote on Truth Social last week. 'The Debt Limit should be entirely scrapped to prevent an Economic catastrophe.' But there's scant support within the GOP for it, as Republicans have found success using it to extract concessions from Democratic presidents in the past. There's no indication that Democrats would respond in kind this year if Republicans came to them and asked for their votes on the debt ceiling. 'I'm not debating hypotheticals,' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said when asked what he'd want in exchange.

Trump trade deal shows how vital China's rare-earth metals are to US defense firms
Trump trade deal shows how vital China's rare-earth metals are to US defense firms

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

Trump trade deal shows how vital China's rare-earth metals are to US defense firms

The draft trade agreement with China announced by Donald Trump on Wednesday would ease concerns from top US military suppliers about rare-earth metals and magnets that, if cut off permanently, could hobble production of everything from smart bombs to fighter jets to submarines and other weapons in the US arsenal. While the deal has not yet been finalised, it may reassure major defense companies such as Lockheed Martin, the largest US user of samarium – a rare-earth metal used in military-grade magnets – whose supply is entirely controlled by China. The issue of China's export restrictions on the metals and magnets was so important that Trump specifically mentioned them as part of his announcement of a broader trade agreement with China that would reduce US tariffs to 55% and Chinese tariffs to 10%. 'Our deal with China is done, subject to final approval with President Xi and me,' Trump wrote. 'Full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied, up front, by China.' Rare earths are crucial to the production of F-35 fighter jets, Virginia- and Columbia-class nuclear-powered submarines, Tomahawk missiles, radar systems, unmanned aerial vehicles and smart bombs, according to Gracelin Baskaran of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a thinktank. China in April imposed export restrictions on seven rare earth elements during the tough negotiations over Trump's new tariffs. China also targeted the aerospace and defense industries by limiting 15 US entities with ties to the industry from receiving dual-use goods. 'The United States is already on the back foot when it comes to manufacturing these defense technologies,' Baskaran said in an interview published by CSIS. 'China is rapidly expanding its munitions production and acquiring advanced weapons systems and equipment at a pace five to six times faster than the United States. While China is preparing with a wartime mindset, the United States continues to operate under peacetime conditions.' Trump has amassed a team of foreign policy China hawks, including a number who have warned that the US should focus more on the pacing threat posed by China over the coming decades instead of current conflicts in Ukraine or the Middle East. 'Even before the latest restrictions, the US defense industrial base struggled with limited capacity and lacked the ability to scale up production to meet defense technology demands,' she continued. 'Further bans on critical minerals inputs will only widen the gap, enabling China to strengthen its military capabilities more quickly than the United States.' China and the United States had agreed last month in Geneva to pause the implementation of sky-high tariffs that would have delivered a severe economic blow to manufacturers and consumers in the US, as well as exporters in China. But China maintained export licenses on rare-earth metals used by both defense producers and carmakers that threatened to upend global supply chains and imperil production in the United States. In particular, China has a stranglehold on the production and export of samarium, a magnet used in combination with cobalt to provide highly durable magnets used to withstand the intense temperatures in military-grade tech. China produces the entire world's supply of the rare-earth metal. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion In particular, the magnets are important for the production of guided missiles, satellite-guided 'smart bombs', and aircrafts, including fighter jets, according to Apex Magnets, a supplier. Those supplies of weapons have been depleted through deliveries of missiles and other ordnance to Ukraine and to the Israeli military. Pentagon planners and other officials in the administration of Joe Biden, regularly squared off over whether foreign weapons deliveries expose a US vulnerability in case it faced off with a major military power. In order to break the deadlock, secretary of state Marco Rubio also abruptly announced plans to cancel hundreds of thousands of visas for Chinese students in the United States. While publicly that was said as a plan to root out Chinese spies in US higher education, Axios reported that the visa ban was also motivated by China's obstinance on resuming rare earths exports. The breakthrough comes as Trump is planning to display US military prowess at a parade in Washington DC this weekend that has been seen as an attempt to flex American muscle and reinforce the US president's bonafides as a supporter of the military. Trump in 2019 ordered the Pentagon to find new sources of procuring rare earth minerals, in particular samarium, because the US did not have the capacity to produce them domestically. The initiative was 'essential to the national defense', he said then.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store