Undermining the Constitution: The US Administration's Attack on the Rule of Law

Violating the US Constitution, engaging in illegal actions, and abusing power undermine the rule of law. Protecting the rule of law is essential to maintain the foundations of democracy and a free society.

"One should first suspect a democratically elected leader of autocratic legalism when he launches a concerted and sustained attack on institutions whose job it is to check his actions or on rules that hold him to account, even when he does so in the name of his democratic mandate." (Autocratic Legalism by Kim Lane Scheppele)

Likely unconstitutional

• First Amendment Violations: the right to free exercise of religion, speech, the press, and to peaceably protest.
  • Signed an executive order that suspends the security clearance of employees of specific law firms and prohibits them from entering government buildings, getting government jobs, or receiving government contracts. These law firms were targeted because of their or their employees' previous work in cases opposed to President Trump or in support of his political rivals. This comes after the president signed an executive order to “end forever the weaponization of government.” The president cannot punish someone for their legal political work. This is a violation of the Constitution’s right to free expression and due process. The law firms targeted include:
    • Covington and Burling for their work advising former special counsel Jack Smith, known for his work investigating President Trump while out of office.
    • Perkins Coie for their work with Democrats during the 2016 presidential campaign. A judge hearing the court challenge described the executive order as “a circumstance [that] threatens the very foundation of our legal system,” while over 500 law firms and 300 former judges filed legal briefs condemning the president’s order.
    • Paul Weiss because one of its former attorneys investigated the president as a Manhattan prosecutor. The White House and Paul Weiss cut a deal for the executive order to be rescinded in exchange for $40 million in free legal assistance.
    • Jenner & Block for hiring a former employee of the Robert Mueller investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
    • WilmerHale for employing Robert Mueller before and after his work as special counsel.
    • Susman Godfrey for successfully suing Fox News over false claims of election fraud. In response, a federal judge said that “the framers of our Constitution would see this as a shocking abuse of power.”
    • Several other law firms have preemptively made deals with the president to avoid punitive executive action. Many expect that this is the chilling effect on the legal system that the Trump Administration is seeking from their punitive executive orders.
  • Sent ultimatums to private colleges and universities to make broad changes to their curriculum, staff and student body regulations, and cede control of their departments to the federal government. The Supreme Court has long held that academic freedom is an extension of the First Amendment, and pressuring a school to accept government control for political purposes violates the school’s right to set its own academic standards. Examples include:
    1. Demanded that Columbia University, among other things, oust the head of an academic department and place the department under academic receivership headed by the White House for five years or else lose over $400 million in federal funding.
    2. Sent a list of demands to Harvard University, including allowing a federally-approved audit of student and faculty groups’ “viewpoints,” and reform departments or admit more students until they achieve “viewpoint diversity.” Harvard rejected these demands and, in response, the Trump Administration froze over $2.2 billion in federal funding to the college. President Trump later threatened to revoke the school’s tax-exempt status and the Department of Education accused Harvard of failing to report donation records, something the college denies.
  • The White House blocked the Associated Press from attending Oval Office and Air Force One press events because the outlet advised its journalists to retain the usage of “The Gulf of Mexico” rather than the president’s preferred “Gulf of America.” The government cannot force an individual or group to use specific words. A federal judge ruled that punishing the AP for their policy represents a violation of free speech, but the White House again blocked the Associated Press from covering its events.
• Fifth Amendment Violations: the right to due process of the law.
  • ICE deported hundreds of foreign nationals, including at least one legal U.S. resident, without a hearing, lawyer, or due process of any kind. The Supreme Court ruled that migrants must be given notice and the chance to contest their deportation. The Trump Administration again attempted to deport more than 50 migrants without their legal rights, so the Supreme Court blocked any further deportations until further direction from the Court.
  • A Turkish doctoral student legally residing in the U.S. was arrested for writing an op-ed that criticized her university’s response to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Her arresting officers refused to let her speak to her lawyer. They also drove her from where she was arrested in Massachusetts to Vermont where she was flown to a detention facility in Louisiana, presumably to find a more favorable court ruling. This is a violation of free speech and the right to due process. A Vermont judge ordered that she be returned to New England.
  • A U.S. citizen was held for hours while trying to cross from the Canadian border. The officers refused to tell him why they were detaining him and he was not read his legal rights.
  • A legal U.S. resident’s visa was secretly revoked by the Department of Homeland Security. The man was arrested on the grounds that he had overstayed his visa.
• Federal Spending Violations:
  • EPA froze and terminated billions of dollars of grants that were allocated by Congress. The Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse and the president is required to ensure the laws Congress passes to be “faithfully executed.”
  • Suspended the activities of the U.S. Agency for Global Media which oversees Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Radio Free Asia which were started to counter Communist propaganda. The news group was established by Congress and, in March, a judge ruled that the administration must continue funding the agency. As of early April, the agency had not received its funds.
  • Signed an executive order to freeze grants that were promised to farms under the Inflation Reduction Act after the farmers entered into contracts with the expectation that they will receive the funding. These funds were appropriated by Congress, and their suspension is a violation of the separation of powers.
  • Signed an executive order cutting $11.4 billion to state and local health departments and health organizations. Congress appropriated this money during the COVID-19 Pandemic and the president does not have the authority to overturn Congressional spending.
• Separation of Powers Violations:
  • Signed an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education, despite this agency being established by Congress. It would take an act of Congress to eliminate the Department.
  • Deported a Rhode Island doctor with a valid visa despite a court order that she not be removed until a hearing be held. The Constitution does not allow the president to defy court orders.
  • The Trump Administration deported a man legally residing in the United States due to, by their own admission, an “administrative error.” The man fled gang violence in El Salvador and was granted protections from being returned to that country by a federal judge in 2019. The government has no evidence of their claim the man is a gang member, other than a photo of the man’s hands digitally altered to show tattoos he does not have. In April, 2025, The Supreme Court ruled that the administration must “facilitate [his] release from custody in El Salvador.” The government has taken no actions to facilitate the man’s release. The Constitution does not allow the president to defy court orders.
  • On March 15, 2025, President Trump ordered the arrest and deportation of hundreds of people residing in the U.S., arguing that they were members of a violent Venezuelan gang. Before the planes carrying these deportees landed, a federal judge ordered that the planes be turned around because the Administration had failed to respect the individuals’ due process and provide a hearing. Government officials ignored these orders and allowed the planes to continue their flight. The Constitution does not allow the president to defy court orders.
• States' Rights Violations:
  • Signed an executive order that forces states to adopt proof of citizenship requirements to vote, remove people from voter rolls, and share election data with the federal government. Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution states “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations…” State election law can only be changed by an act of Congress.
• Other Constitutional Violation:
  • Signed executive order ending birthright citizenship. The U.S. Constitution explicitly states that all individuals born in the U.S. are U.S. citizens, and decades of legal precedent have affirmed birthright citizenship.

Likely illegal

• Signed an executive order ending the collective bargaining agreements of employees of about 20 federal agencies. The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 gives the president the authority to halt collective bargaining at agencies related to national security like the CIA and FBI. This order expands to federal employees across the government like at the Departments of Agriculture and Health & Human Services.
• The National Institutes of Health terminated hundreds of grants without following the Administrative Procedures Act which outlines how federal agencies can make such decisions.
• Top White House officials shared detailed war plans on a publicly-available messaging service and accidentally included a journalist in the communications. This likely violates the Espionage Act, which prohibits the intentional or inadvertent sharing of national defence information. The messages were later deleted from the phone of the CIA director after an order from a federal judge to preserve the communications. This is a violation of the Presidential Records Act and Federal Records Act—which outline a procedure for preserving communication related to official government business—as well as disobedience to the Judicial Branch. It was later revealed that the Defense Secretary shared war plans on a second group chat which included his wife, brother, and personal lawyer.
• DOGE has gained access to government databases that store a slew of citizens; personal information, including name, social security number, address, medical diagnoses and treatments, notes from therapy sessions, income information, union records, proprietary business secrets, data on ongoing court cases, among others. This is a violation of the American Privacy Act, which governs how the government collects, stores, and shares personal information, including between agencies.
  • DOGE has reportedly been using this information to compile a master database with all government data on individuals, including sensitive biometric data, with the primary purpose of surveilling undocumented immigrants. This has nothing to do with DOGE’s purported mission of eliminating wasteful spending.
• Fired 18 Inspectors General, Congressionally-created positions tasked with monitoring waste, fraud, and abuse, across federal government departments. The president is required by law to inform Congress of the firings and the reasons behind them, but the Trump Administration gave Congress no information on the 18 firings. A federal judge said that this is a likely violation of the law.
• The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau laid off almost 90% of its employees less than a day after a judicial order requiring a “particularized assessment” of each employee’s role in satisfying the Bureau’s legal duty. It is unlikely the officials were able to conduct an assessment of nearly 1,700 employee’s responsibilities in less than 24 hours. The same judge halted the firings until the CFPB could provide more evidence on how the lay-offs were carried out.

Abuse of power

• President Trump posted on social media “IT’S A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!! DJT” hours before announcing a 90-day pause on his retaliatory tariffs. In response to the pause, the stock market jumped up. President Trump’s company, Trump Media and Technology Group which uses “DJT” as a stock symbol, saw its stock price rise 22% after the tariff pause. There is no evidence that this meets the legal definition of insider trading or market manipulation, but questions remain about who had knowledge of the tariff pause before it was public and their investment activities.
• President Trump has asserted pressure on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell to lower interest rates by threatening to fire him, which is not permitted by law. The Federal Reserve is designed to be shielded from political pressure and has two mandates: keep inflation low and unemployment low.
• Solicited corporate sponsors for his inauguration, garnering $239 million in donations. The previous record was set at $107 million for the first Trump Inauguration. Presidential inaugurations have never cost nearly that much and it is unknown what the remaining funds are being used for.
• Solicited corporate sponsors for the annual White House Easter Egg Roll. Top sponsors included Silicon Valley tech giants like Meta, YouTube, and Amazon. Executives at these companies likewise donated to President Trump’s inauguration fund and were gifted front-row seats. The increased financial contributions from tech giants is notable given the favorable regulatory environment President Trump has promised.
• The acting U.S. attorney in DC sent a letter to a respected, peer-reviewed medical journal for an investigation on how its editors handle “competing viewpoints” in the scientific community. Members of the medical community viewed this as a legal threat to align the magazine’s content with the political aims of the Trump Administration.