The Democracy Index

May 23, 2025

A spectacle and a sabotage. That was the latest disgraceful display in the Oval Office this week, when the president of the United States ambushed the South African president with patently false white supremacist claims that South Africa is conducting a “genocide” of white South African farmers. That bizarre and disturbing episode provided a capstone to a week when the Trump Administration took new steps in abusing the power of government to attack institutions and perceived enemies. However, this week also featured important instances of the federal judiciary — the institution most strongly protecting the rule of law — pushing back and thwarting these unlawful actions.

All of those elements are reflected in our visual Index this week, where you can explore each story in greater detail through the interactive graphic.

This president has a peculiar taste for humiliation, something that has been at the center of his political style. Recently, that has taken the form of ambushing and picking on world leaders he knows are in some way reliant or dependent upon the United States’s support — and therefore his support as president. After the contretemps with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy in February, President Trump engaged in a strange sequel when he met with the South African president Cyril Ramaphosa this week. Trump steamrolled him, peddling white supremacist grist, and deploying a brand new method of disgrace – forcing the South African president to watch misleading and untrue videos of purported genocide. Ramaphosa was left futilely trying to explain the actual facts of the matter to the president, who would hear none of it.

This type of public shaming is a one element in autocratic governance — the manifestation of power in one man, who engages in ritualistic displays of dominance.

That spectacle goes hand-in-glove with the quieter but more insidious abuse of power that this administration has engaged in, using the federal government to go after the leader’s institutions and enemies.

Most recently, there was the shocking announcement from the Trump Administration last night that it was going to end Harvard’s ability to enroll international students, both current and future. The Department of Homeland Security informed the university that its Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification had been revoked via a letter from Kristi Noem (you know, the person who couldn’t tell Congress what habeas corpus is?). But Harvard is continuing to fight back. Less than 24 hours after the announcement, the university sued the administration asking for a temporary restraining order. As Harvard’s memorandum in support of emergency relief states,

Countless academic programs, laboratories, clinics, and courses that these students support will be thrown into disarray. Classmates, teammates, and roommates will be immediately separated. All told, the revocation upends Harvard’s decades of work and extensive investments to cultivate the programs, opportunities, personnel, and reputation that allow Harvard to attract the most talented international students and integrate them into its community, many of whom will go on to engage in pioneering research, invent groundbreaking technologies, and start thriving businesses here in America. The effects on Harvard’s students—all of its students—will be devastating. Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard.

The Judge presiding over the case, Allison Burroughs, immediately granted a temporary restraining order.

The Administration has also set its sights on the media. On Wednesday, the Federal Trade Commission opened an investigation into Media Matters, a liberal watchdog organization that was sued by Elon Musk in 2023. The FTC is demanding that Media Matters turn over materials related to the suit, which Musk brought against the organization after it released multiple reports demonstrating that advertisements were being placed alongside pro-Nazi content on X.

And the week began with perhaps the most egregious example yet of weaponizing the government: Interim U.S. Attorney for New Jersey Alina Habba criminally charging Rep. LaMonica McIver. It was just the latest in a dangerous trend of the Trump DOJ prosecuting members of the other two branches of government they view as the “opposition,” coming on the heels of the arrest of Judge Hannah Dugan in Wisconsin last month. In her Substack post last night, Joyce went through some of the details of the prosecution, and the danger it poses. At the broadest level, though, these arrests represent a dangerous crossing of the Rubicon.

But even as some institutions face these unprecedented attacks, the courts remain the strongest bulwark against unlawful abuses of power.

On Tuesday, the Trump Administration sent eight migrants on a flight to South Sudan, a country at risk of collapsing into civil war. Horrifyingly, only one of the eight men is actually a citizen of South Sudan. But U.S. District Court Judge Brian Murphy issued an emergency order requiring the Trump administration to “maintain custody and control of class members currently being removed” and to grant them an interview and legal representation. For now, the migrants are stuck in Djibouti while the litigation plays out. Although the situation of the eight men has not been rectified, it is worth noting that the court recognizes this move by Trump to be completely out of the norm.

Additionally, Judge Myong J. Joun of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted a preliminary injunction on Thursday blocking Trump’s executive order to dismantle the Department of Education and ordering the re-hiring of the fired agency employees. Judge Joun agreed with the plaintiffs that the attempted shutdown by the president was an illegal move, as only Congress has the authority to dismantle a federal agency.

And, perhaps most significantly, in San Francisco late last night, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston delivered a preliminary injunction blocking Trump’s attempt to dismantle federal agencies from within using Musk’s DOGE program. Judge Illston ruled that "agencies may not conduct large-scale reorganizations and reductions in force in blatant disregard of Congress's mandates, and a President may not initiate large-scale executive branch reorganization without partnering with Congress.” Thus the court held that the large-scale effort to dismantle the federal government is unlawful, and halts the firings and “reorganizations” Trump and Musk have tried to force through.

We are living in a moment that explains the insistence of the Founding Fathers on sharing power among the three branches of government, so that no one branch could become too powerful and corruptly seize control in a way that is contrary to the best interests of Americans. This week, we watched the neck-and-neck race between the executive and judicial branches of government. Congress, which could step in and shift the balance decisively if it chose to, is still in thrall to the president. But there are elections coming, and we must all begin to work towards that moment, when the most important players in American democracy, the voters, will have their say.

Until next week,

The Democracy Index team