AMERICA NEEDS A MASS MOVEMENT—NOW: Without one, America may sink into autocracy for decades.; The Atlantic, October 14, 2025

David Brooks , The Atlantic; AMERICA NEEDS A MASS MOVEMENT—NOW

"For their 2011 book, Why Civil Resistance Works, the political scientists Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan looked at 323 resistance movements from 1900 to 2006, including more than 100 nonviolent resistance campaigns. What Chenoweth and Stephan showed is that citizens are not powerless; they have many ways to defend democracy.

For the United States, the question of the decade is: Why hasn’t a resistance movement materialized here? The second Trump administration has flouted court decisions in a third of all rulings against it, according to The Washington Post. It operates as a national extortion racket, using federal power to control the inner workings of universities, law firms, and corporations. It has thoroughly politicized the Justice Department, launching a series of partisan investigations against its political foes. It has turned ICE into a massive paramilitary organization with apparently unconstrained powers. It has treated the Constitution with disdain, assaulted democratic norms and diminished democratic freedoms, and put military vehicles and soldiers on the streets of the capital. It embraces the optics of fascism, and flaunts its autocratic aspirations.

I am not one of those who believe that Donald Trump has already turned America into a dictatorship. Yet the crossing-over from freedom into authoritarianism may be marked not by a single dramatic event but by the slow corrosion of our ruling institutions—and that corrosion is well under way. For 250 years, the essence of America’s democratic system, drawing on thinkers going back to Cicero and Cato, has been that no one is above the law. Public officials’ first duty is to put the law before the satisfaction of their own selfish impulses. That concept is alien to Trump."

‘Bow to the Emperor’: We Asked 50 Legal Experts About the Trump Presidency; The New York Times Magazine, October 6, 2025

Emily Bazelon , The New York Times Magazine ; ‘Bow to the Emperor’: We Asked 50 Legal Experts About the Trump Presidency

"Last year, in the months before the 2024 presidential election, the magazine surveyed 50 members of what might be called the Washington legal establishment about their expectations for the Justice Department and the rule of law if Donald Trump were re-elected. The group was evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. They had worked as high-level officials for every president since Ronald Reagan.

A majority of our respondents told us they were alarmed about a potential second Trump term given the strain he put on the legal system the first time around. But several dissenters countered that those fears were overblown. One former Trump official predicted that the Justice Department would be led by lawyers like those in the first term — elite, conservative and independent. “It’s hard to be a bad-faith actor at the Justice Department,” he said at the time. “And the president likes the Ivy League and Supreme Court clerkships on résumés.”

Eight months into his second term, Trump has taken a wrecking ball to those beliefs."

Judges Warn ICE Is Turning Courts Into Deportation Traps; Law360, September 5, 2025

Marco Poggio, Law360; Judges Warn ICE Is Turning Courts Into Deportation Traps

""I want to thank everybody for coming here today and taking these hearings seriously," Judge Loprest said. "Have a very good rest of the day. Have a good rest of the summer, a good rest of the year."

But moments later, the goodwill Judge Loprest carefully built collapsed into farce: As the immigrants stepped into the hallway, ICE agents grabbed them, placed them in handcuffs and led them away through a side stairway, letting go only the women with children.

Arrests of noncitizens attending immigration court hearings have wreaked havoc among immigrant communities and alarmed attorneys and judges about what they see as violations of due process.

The Trump administration has been internally pushing for a minimum of 3,000 arrests of noncitizens per day. In an effort to meet that goal, ICE agents have been apprehending people in all areas inside and outside immigration court buildings across the country: hallways, lobbies, parking lots and elevators.

Former and current immigration judges who spoke with Law360 are warning that the Trump administration is using courts as a dragnet, arresting people indiscriminately and expelling them with little to no due process in a bid to fulfill President Donald Trump's goal of mass deportations.

"In order to create the vast numbers of arrests that the White House is demanding, they are arresting people who, minutes before their arrest, have legal status, and they're breaking the law left and right to do it," said Judge Dana Leigh Marks, who retired in 2021."

Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts; The Conversation, July 23, 2025

1. Cassandra Burke Robertson, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Professional Ethics, Case Western Reserve University, The Conversation; Immigration courts hiding the names of ICE lawyers goes against centuries of precedent and legal ethics requiring transparency in courts

[Kip Currier: ICE immigration lawyers intentionally hiding their names, and immigration court judges facilitating this practice, should chill the blood of any lawyer and non-lawyer concerned about accountability, transparency, ethics, and the rule of law in a democratic country. This is not normal practice for free societies that value public trust. We should not and cannot permit such actions to be normalized: civil watchdogs like the ACLU and legal groups like the American Bar Association (ABA) have a responsibility to publicize their positions on these concerning Kafkaesque developments in U.S. courts and society at large.

The speed at which the U.S. is transitioning into an autocratic police state since Inauguration Day 2025 is both stunning and terrifying.

For more information on these issues, see here and here.]

[Excerpt]

1. "Something unusual is happening in U.S. immigration courts. Government lawyers are refusing to give their names during public hearings.
2. 
   
3. In June 2025, Immigration Judge ShaSha Xu in New York City reportedly told lawyers in her courtroom: “We’re not really doing names publicly.” Only the government lawyers’ names were hidden – the immigrants’ attorneys had to give their names as usual. Xu cited privacy concerns, saying, “Things lately have changed.
4. 
   
5. When one immigration lawyer objected that the court record would be incomplete without the government attorney’s name, Xu reportedly refused to provide it. In another case, New York immigration Judge James McCarthy in July referred to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, attorney as merely “Department” throughout the hearing.
6. 
   
7. New York immigration Judge Shirley Lazare-Raphael told The Intercept that some ICE attorneys believe it is “dangerous to state their names publicly.” This follows a broader pattern of ICE agents wearing masks during arrests to hide their identities. 
8. This secrecy violates a fundamental principle that has protected Americans for centuries: open courts. Here’s how those courts operate and why the principle governing them matters."

Commentary: A win-win-win path for AI in America; The Post & Courier, July 22, 2025

 Keith Kupferschmid, The Post & Courier; Commentary: A win-win-win path for AI in America

"Contrary to claims that these AI training deals are impossible to make at scale, a robust free market is already emerging in which hundreds (if not thousands) of licensed deals between AI companies and copyright owners have been reached. New research shows it is possible to create fully licensed data sets for AI.

No wonder one federal judge recently called claims that licensing is impractical “ridiculous,” given the billions at stake: “If using copyrighted works to train the models is as necessary as the companies say, they will figure out a way to compensate copyright holders.” Just like AI companies don’t dispute that they have to pay for energy, infrastructure, coding teams and the other inputs their operations require, they need to pay for creative works as well.

America’s example to the world is a free-market economy based on the rule of law, property rights and freedom to contract — so, let the market innovate solutions to these new (but not so new) licensing challenges. Let’s construct a pro-innovation, pro-worker approach that replaces the false choice of the AI alarmists with a positive, pro-America pathway to leadership on AI."

Big Law Firms Bowed to Trump. A Corps of ‘Little Guys’ Jumped in to Fight Him.; The New York Times, July 21, 2025

 Elizabeth Williamson, The New York Times; Big Law Firms Bowed to Trump. A Corps of ‘Little Guys’ Jumped in to Fight Him.

[Kip Currier: A must-read article for anyone looking for lawyers willing "to fight the good fight". 

Kudos to these "officers of the court" who are standing up for the rule of law and the U.S. legal system's bedrock ethical principles and responsibilities.]

[Excerpt]

"President Trump’s executive orders seeking to punish big law firms have led some of them to acquiesce to him and left others reluctant to take on pro bono cases that could put them at odds with the administration.

But as opponents of the White House’s policies organized to fight Mr. Trump in court on a vast range of actions and policies, they quickly found that they did not need to rely on Big Law. Instead, an army of solo practitioners, former government litigators and small law firms stepped up to volunteer their time to challenge the administration’s agenda."

A Reckless Judicial Nomination Puts the Senate to the Test; The New York Times, June 29, 2025

DAVID FRENCH , The New York Times; A Reckless Judicial Nomination Puts the Senate to the Test

"Emil Bove, however, would be a problem for a very long time. At 44 years old, he’s been nominated for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench. That means he’d long outlast Trump in the halls of American power, and if past performance is any measure of future results, we should prepare for a judge who would do what he deems necessary to accomplish his political objectives — law and morality be damned...

Our nation does not need vengeful political operatives on the federal bench. Bove is a far worse nominee than Miers. Critics questioned her experience and her qualifications. They did not question her integrity. But with Emil Bove, integrity is precisely what is in doubt."

Justices need to own the consequences of their injunction ruling; The Washington Post, June 29, 2025

Editorial Board , The Washington Post; Justices need to own the consequences of their injunction ruling

"The bigger picture, though, is that the justices have now reserved to themselves alone the ability to issue nationwide injunctions. This will make it easier for the president and his executive branch officials to violate even black-letter constitutional rights as the country waits for the high court to tell them to stop."

A fourth judge has blocked a Trump executive order targeting elite law firms; NPR, June 27, 2025

Ryan Lucas, NPR; A fourth judge has blocked a Trump executive order targeting elite law firms

"A federal judge has struck down President Trump's executive order targeting the law firm Susman Godfrey, delivering the latest in a series of legal wins for firms that have challenged the president's punitive campaign against Big Law.

The ruling Friday from U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan marks the fourth time out of four that a federal judge has permanently blocked one of Trump's executive orders seeking to punish an elite law firm.

Judge AliKhan said in her ruling that the executive order against Susman Godfrey "is unconstitutional from beginning to end."

"Every court to have considered a challenge to one of these orders has found grave constitutional violations and permanently enjoined enforcement of the order in full," she wrote. "Today, this court follows suit, concluding that the order targeting Susman violates the U.S. Constitution and must be permanently enjoined.

"The Court's ruling is a resounding victory for the rule of law and the right of every American to be represented by legal counsel without fear of retaliation," Susman Godfrey said in a statement. "We applaud the Court for declaring the administration's order unconstitutional. Our firm is committed to the rule of law and to protecting the rights of our clients without regard to their political or other beliefs."

The latest order delivers a resounding rebuke to Trump's unprecedented series of executive orders targeting prominent law firms since February. The orders have sought to punish them for representing causes or clients that he opposes, or for once employing attorneys he dislikes, such as former special counsel Robert Mueller."

Emil Bove’s ‘I’m Not A Henchman’ T-Shirt Has People Asking Questions At Judicial Confirmation Hearing; Above The Law, June 26, 2025

 Liz Dye  , Above The Law; Emil Bove’s ‘I’m Not A Henchman’ T-Shirt Has People Asking Questions At Judicial Confirmation Hearing

"Emil Bove, III began his career at the Southern District of New York, where he was by all accounts a competent prosecutor. His management style left something to be desired, however, and he was denied promotion for “abusive” behavior

(Opens in a new window) toward his subordinates...

Third Circuit, here he comes!

On Wednesday, June 25, Bove appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is considering his nomination to the Third Circuit.

He opened by insisting, “I am not anybody’s henchman, I am not an enforcer. I’m a lawyer from a small town, who never expected to be in an arena like this.”

That is horseshit, of course. No one gets to “an arena like this” without a healthy dose of ambition. Note that Bove’s aw shucks modesty didn’t extend to telling the White House that he’d be a more appropriate nominee the US District Court.

And although his tone during the hearing was measured, his willingness to twist the truth was on full display

Asked about the Adams case, Bove pointed to the order dismissing the charges(Opens in a new window) as proof that he’d behaved appropriately. In reality, the Justice Department’s refusal to prosecute left the court little choice. And Judge Dale Ho denied the DOJ’s request to dismiss without prejudice, because allowing the Trump administration to reap the benefits of a corrupt bargain would be “difficult to square with the words engraved above the front entrance of the United States Supreme Court: ‘Equal Justice Under Law.’”

Bove denied telling subordinates to defy a court order, but said he just plum couldn’t remember if he’d told them to give the bird to a federal judge.

Over and over he simply refused to answer questions based on spurious claims about the deliberative process privilege. But, he assured the senators, all was on the up and up, even if he couldn’t commit(Opens in a new window) to recusing from cases involving his former client Donald Trump.

And if any Republican senator might be tempted to vote no, he brought out the big guns. Alan Dershowitz, late of Harvard Law (and his marbles), sent a letter(Opens in a new window) to the Judiciary Committee gushing that “Mr. Bove’s superior character, demeanor and diligence are evident throughout his time as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General, as well as in private practice.”"

(Opens in a new windowtoward his subordinates.

The alarming rise of US officers hiding behind masks: ‘A police state’; The Guardian, June 25, 2025

Sam Levin, The Guardian ; The alarming rise of US officers hiding behind masks: ‘A police state’

Mike German, an ex-FBI agent, said immigration agents hiding their identities ‘highlights the illegitimacy of actions’

"Some wear balaclavas. Some wear neck gators, sunglasses and hats. Some wear masks and casual clothes.

Across the country, armed federal immigration officers have increasingly hidden their identities while carrying out immigration raids, arresting protesters and roughing up prominent Democratic critics.

It’s a trend that has sparked alarm among civil rights and law enforcement experts alike.

Mike German, a former FBI agent, said officers’ widespread use of masks was unprecedented in US law enforcement and a sign of a rapidly eroding democracy. “Masking symbolizes the drift of law enforcement away from democratic controls,” he said.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has insisted masks are necessary to protect officers’ privacy, arguing, without providing evidence, that there has been an uptick in violence against agents...

Were you surprised by the frequent reports of federal officers covering their faces and refusing to identify themselves, especially during the recent immigration raids and protests in Los Angeles?

It is absolutely shocking and frightening to see masked agents, who are also poorly identified in the way they are dressed, using force in public without clearly identifying themselves. Our country is known for having democratic control over law enforcement. When it’s hard to tell who a masked individual is working for, it’s hard to accept that that is a legitimate use of authority. It’s particularly important for officers to identify themselves when they are making arrests. It’s important for the person being arrested, and for community members who might be watching, that they understand this is a law enforcement activity."

Whistleblower: Trump judge nominee told DOJ lawyers to ignore court orders; Axios, June 24, 2025

 

• Jason Lalljee, Axios; Whistleblower: Trump judge nominee told DOJ lawyers to ignore court orders

"Why it matters: The official in question, Emil Bove, is Trump's former personal attorney and a current Trump nominee for a federal appeals court judge.

Driving the news: DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni and the whistleblower, identified as a fired DOJ lawyer, told the DOJ's internal watchdog and members of Congress in a letter that Bove told attorneys to consider telling judges "f––k you" in order "to implement the administration's removal priorities."

Those removal priorities include the Trump admin's efforts to deport immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act, which the Supreme Court blocked in March.

Bove, during a March 14 meeting with the whistleblower, Reuveni and others in the department, "stressed to all in attendance that the planes [carrying the immigrants] needed to take off no matter what," per the letter.

"Mr. Reuveni, almost immediately after receiving notice of his promotion to serve as Acting Deputy Director of OIL, became aware of the plans of DOJ leadership to resist court orders that would impede potentially illegal efforts to deport noncitizens, and further became aware of the details to execute those plans," the letter states.

The letter comes as multiple federal judges have said that the DOJ has failed to comply with court orders and as the DOJ antagonizes judges who run afoul of the Trump administration."

American Bar Association files suit to halt government intimidation of lawyers and law firms; American Bar Association (ABA), June 16, 2025

American Bar Association (ABA); American Bar Association files suit to halt government intimidation of lawyers and law firms

"The American Bar Association today filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government, more than two dozen federal departments and agencies, and the heads of those departments and agencies, asking a federal court to declare unconstitutional the Trump administration’s ongoing unlawful policy of intimidation against lawyers and law firms and to enjoin the government from enforcing the policy. 

Since taking office earlier this year, President Donald Trump and his administration have used the vast powers of the executive branch to coerce lawyers and law firms to abandon clients, causes and policy positions the president does not like, the lawsuit asserts. The Trump administration has carried out this policy through a series of executive orders, letters, memos and public statements designed to damage certain law firms and intimidate others. These relentless attacks have produced a chilling effect across the legal profession — including on many members of the American Bar Association — causing harm to the justice system at large and limiting access to representation for individuals and organizations whose positions the administration disfavors. 

The ABA stands for the rule of law and access to justice for all. Today, the American legal profession and the members of the American Bar Association face an unprecedented challenge. As the nation’s largest voluntary association of lawyers, the ABA is compelled to take action and seek meaningful relief through the courts on behalf of its members and in support of the American bar. 

Attacks on the legal profession are uniquely destructive because of the critical role that lawyers fulfill in the constitutional system of our country, the lawsuit notes. Without skilled lawyers to bring and argue cases, the judiciary cannot function as a meaningful check on the executive branch.  

The ABA’s lawsuit details how President Trump and his administration have adopted and implemented this Law Firm Intimidation Policy on an ongoing basis. The administration has targeted firms who have engaged in disfavored conduct. It has issued sanctions designed to cripple their businesses and limit their ability to freely represent clients. Tactics include terminating security clearances, severing government contracts of law firms and their clients, limiting access to federal buildings and refraining from hiring employees of certain firms for jobs in the federal government. 

As detailed in the filing, some firms have contested the orders in court while many others have entered into deals with the administration to avoid becoming the target of future executive orders. The result of the Law Firm Intimidation Policy has been a pervasive fear within the legal community and the justice system at large. Many attorneys are no longer willing to take on representations that would require suing the federal government because doing so poses a serious risk of becoming the next target of the administration’s devastating sanctions. This blizzard-like chill on the profession has continued even after firms challenging their own executive orders have won repeated court victories. Those victories only protect those firms. The ABA has filed this action to protect all its members, representing a far broader section of the legal profession.

The administration has demonstrated that it intends to continue the Law Firm Intimidation Policy in order to intimidate lawyers and law firms from taking on cases adverse to the president’s interests. These attacks are clear violations of First Amendment rights, including prohibitions on government coercion to suppress free speech, discrimination based on viewpoints held by lawyers and law firms, and the right of citizens to assemble freely and to petition the government. 

“This is the time to stand up, speak out and seek relief from our courts” said William R. Bay, president of the American Bar Association. “There has never been a more urgent time for the ABA to defend its members, our profession and the rule of law itself.” 

The case, American Bar Association v. Executive Office of the President, et al.,  has been filed in the United States District Court in the District of Columbia. 

Read the filing here.

The ABA is one of the largest voluntary associations of lawyers in the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding around the world of the importance of the rule of law. View our privacy statement online. Follow the latest ABA news at www.americanbar.org/news and on X (formerly Twitter) @ABANews."

Trump attacks Watergate laws in massive shift of ethics system; The Washington Post, June 21, 2025

Naftali Bendavid, The Washington Post; Trump attacks Watergate laws in massive shift of ethics system

"Then-Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman was 32 when, as a member of the House Judiciary Committee, she voted in 1974 for three articles of impeachment against President Richard M. Nixon. She spent the next few years as part of a Congress that passed wave after wave of laws to rein in future presidents.

A half-century later, Holtzman, a New York Democrat, is watching as President Donald Trump takes aim at post-Watergate reforms on transparency, spending, conflicts of interest and more. By challenging and disregarding, in letter or in spirit, this slew of 1970s laws, Trump is essentially closing the 50-year post-Watergate chapter of American history — and ushering in a new era of shaky guardrails and blurred separation of powers.

“We didn’t envision this,” Holtzman said. “We saw Nixon doing it, but he hadn’t done it on this vast a scale. Trump is saying, ‘Congress cannot tell me what to do about anything.’”...

This broad rejection of the post-Watergate laws underlines the country’s shift from an era focused on clean government and strict ethics to the rise of a president whose appeal stems in part from his willingness to violate such rules and constraints.

“There has been a collapse, at least temporarily, of the kind of outrage and ethical standards that were prevalent during the days of Watergate,” said Richard Ben-Veniste, who headed the special counsel’s Watergate Task Force."

Could the Third Time Be the Charm on Impeachment and Removal?; The New York Times, June 17, 2025

 Thomas B. Edsall, The New York Times; Could the Third Time Be the Charm on Impeachment and Removal?

"It was clear from the first day of President Trump’s second term that Round 2 would be very different from Round 1.

Trump’s revocation of law firms’ security clearances and access to federal facilities, his cutoff of research grants to Harvard, his multimillion-dollar cryptocurrency deals, his decision to send 700 Marines to contain protests in a five-block section of Los Angeles, his usurpation of congressional power over federal spending — all of these acts have left millions of Americans aggravated and apprehensive, even as a substantial number of U.S. citizens remain untouched and largely unmoved.

We now have a president imposing an agenda far more dangerous than anything Richard Nixon dreamed of.

Here is one measure of Trump’s reign of corruption.

In the five months Trump has held office in his second term, the number of impeachable offenses legal scholars estimate that he has already committed ranges from three to eight or more...

I asked Michael Gerhardt, a law professor at the University of North Carolina who has often appeared as an expert witness at congressional hearings on impeachment, about Trump. Gerhardt replied by email: “It is nearly impossible to overstate the degree of Trump’s corruption. It is manifest every day, as if he is daring the American people and Congress to try to stop him.”

Overall, Gerhardt continued: “Trump has shown time and again his disdain for the rule of law, including for the Constitution of the United States. He has routinely violated his oath of office and even proclaimed himself as entitled to break the law to save the country.”

No other American president, Gerhardt went on, “has come anywhere close to Trump’s corruption, and the level of his corruption — on a daily basis — is unmatched in our history.”"

Seven partners depart law firm Willkie Farr to join Cooley after Trump deal; Reuters, June 13, 2025

 Sara Merken, Reuters; Seven partners depart law firm Willkie Farr to join Cooley after Trump deal

"A group of seven partners is leaving Willkie Farr & Gallagher, which struck a deal with U.S. President Donald Trump in April to avert an executive order targeting its business, to join Cooley, which is representing one of the law firms fighting Trump's orders.

Cooley on Friday said Simona Agnolucci, Benedict Hur, Joshua Anderson, Tiffany Lin, Jonathan Patchen, Michael Rome and Eduardo Santacana are joining the firm as litigation partners in San Francisco."

No Kings Day: June 14 protests set to be biggest yet, will counter Trump military parade in locations nationwide. Here’s what to know; Fast Company, June 10, 2025

JENNIFER MATTSON , Fast Company; No Kings Day: June 14 protests set to be biggest yet, will counter Trump military parade in locations nationwide. Here’s what to know

"June 14 is shaping up to be a big day, with millions of Americans expected to take to the streets in an event dubbed “No Kings Day,” which organizers have said will likely be the largest single-day turnout of the anti-Trump, pro-democracy protest movement since President Donald Trump took office for a second term in January.

Organizers expect 1,800 rallies will take place on Saturday for “a nationwide day of defiance” in every state and major city across the country—except Washington, D.C., as to avoid clashes with the Army’s 250th anniversary celebrations, which will be held that day in the nation’s capital (more on that below).

In a statement to Fast Company, the No Kings organizers described their event as “peaceful, organized, and united.” They added: “Make it clear: We don’t do kings in this country.”"

A Comprehensive Accounting of Trump’s Culture of Corruption; The New York Times, June 7, 2025

 The Editorial Board, The New York Times; A Comprehensive Accounting of Trump’s Culture of Corruption

"The message seemed obvious enough: People who make Mr. Trump richer regularly receive favorable treatment from the government he runs.

The cryptocurrency industry is perhaps the starkest example of the culture of corruption in his second term. He and his relatives directly benefit from the sale of their cryptocurrency by receiving a cut of the investment. Even if the price of the coins later falls and investors lose money, the Trumps can continue to benefit by receiving a commission on future sales. Forbes magazine estimates that he made about $1 billion in cryptocurrency in the past nine months, about one-sixth of his net worth...

The self-enrichment of the second Trump administration is different from old-fashioned corruption. There is no evidence that Mr. Trump has received direct bribes, nor is it clear that he has agreed to specific policy changes in exchange for cash. Nonetheless, he is presiding over a culture of corruption. He and his family have created several ways for people to enrich them — and government policy then changes in ways that benefit those who have helped the Trumps profit. Often Mr. Trump does not even try to hide the situation. As the historian Matthew Dallek recently put it, “Trump is the most brazenly corrupt national politician in modern times, and his openness about it is sui generis.” He is proud of his avarice, wearing it as a sign of success and savvy.

This culture is part of Mr. Trump’s larger efforts to weaken American democracy and turn the federal government into an extension of himself. He has pushed the interests of the American people to the side, in favor of his personal interests. His actions reduce an already shaky public faith in government. By using the power of the people for personal gain, he degrades that power for any other purpose. He stains the reputation of the United States, which has long stood out as a place where confidence in the rule of law fosters confidence in the economy and financial markets. This country was not previously known as an executive kleptocracy."