Anyone who attended high school probably remembers their world history teacher talking about countries that militarized their law enforcement to make what is referred to as a police state. Examples taught should have included SS members of Nazi Germany (1925-1945), the secret police—NKVD—of the Soviet Union (1934-1946), the military regime of Chilean Dictator Augusto Pinochet (1973-1990), and the apartheid-era (1948-1994) of South Africa.
On April 28, President Donald Trump issued an 879-page executive order (EO) commanding Pam Bondi and Pete Hegseth to work with Kristi Noem and other agencies to “increase the provision of excess military and national security assets in local jurisdictions to assist State and local law enforcement.”
The Legal Defense Fund states Trump’s EO directs federal resources to “promote aggressive policing tactics and further militarize local law enforcement agencies, make it more difficult to hold officers accountable for misconduct and wield the power of prosecution as a threat.” Writer Jim Jordan opines in a June 14 essay that Trump’s EO “calls for a militarized police service in the US, one that essentially operates under martial law” (CommonWealth Beacon).
Stephen Miller and Project 2025’s Police State Proposal
It should be no surprise that Trump’s EO is rooted in Stephen Miller, the far-right anti-immigration policy advisor to the Heritage Foundation on its creation of Project 2025, the playbook for Mr. Trump to implement in the first 180 days of his presidential administration. And, behold, July 19 was Trump’s 180th day in office.
One of the key components of the 922-page Project 2025 playbook for Donald Trump to follow was mass deportations, increasing border enforcement, and changing America’s long-revered asylum system (Project 2025 is a threat to democracy, June 4, 2024, The Fulcrum).
Trump’s aggressive actions
Most people know that ICE, DHS, FBI, and DEA conducted coordinated raids across Los Angeles, targeted workplaces, and arrested people suspected of being undocumented immigrants. On June 24, CBS News reported that of the 59,000 immigrant detainees, fewer than 30 percent have been convicted of crimes. The Washington Post’s July 3 story confirmed this data.
Ten different independent and reliable sources document how Trump 2.0’s administration is systematically dismantling democratic safeguards that rely on civil governance.
They include: 1) police in riot gear dispersing protesters who are using their First Amendment rights to oppose ICE raids, 2) National Guard troops being deployed to quell peaceful protests, 3) framing citizen protests as an “insurrection” and a “national security threat,” 4) federal agents arresting citizens whose immigration-related cases have been dismissed by judges, 5) expanding and creating detention camps, 6) heavily armed and masked men abducting individuals without warrants or identification, 7) providing police with military-grade equipment, 8) closing down the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and 9) eliminating the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration.
When Trump signed the “Big, Beautiful Bill” into law on July 4 (opposed by all Democrats and approved by all Republicans except five), it wasn’t a celebration of Independence Day but the ramping up of America’s unchecked executive power and militarized policing. The law provided roughly $170,000,000,000 for immigration enforcement, including the hiring of 10,000 new ICE officers.
Hope on the Horizon
While deporting undocumented immigrants—a key tenant of Trump’s 2025 presidential campaign and Project 2025—was supported by a majority of voters, July 11 Gallup poll data found that: A) 62 percent of Americans disapprove how the Trump administration is handling the deportation issue, B) 78 percent of Americans now favor offering pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and C) 79 percent of Americans say immigration is a good thing; the percentage should be considerably higher since 97.1% of people live in America due to immigration by their original settler family.
Twenty-seven different religious groups—including major Christian and Jewish denominations—oppose Trump’s police state-like actions (NBC News, Feb. 11).
A Call to Conscience
Citizens now recognize that Trump’s militarization strategy mirrors the early stages of a police state development. But, unlike historical regimes (Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, Chile, and South Africa), the U.S. still retains independent courts, freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, a free press, and elections.
It’s time to ask your elected delegates to the U.S. Capitol to retake a high school world history class, reflect on the documented examples of the similarities of Trump’s actions to police state endeavors, and act—legislation wise—before the situation gets any worse.
Citizens must continue to exercise their First Amendment rights, especially those of free speech, free press, and assembly, against Trump’s shift toward unchecked executive power and militarized policing.
Finally, Nov. 3, 2026, should be a `Save the Date’ as that’s when 33 U.S. Senate seats and all 435 House seats are up for the elected delegates to represent our wishes versus those of a particular party and/or anti-immigration influence groups.
Steve Corbin is a professor emeritus of marketing at the University of Northern Iowa, and a non-paid freelance opinion editor and guest columnist contributor to 246 news agencies and 48 social media platforms in 45 states.Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly referred to Rep. Jim Jordan rather than the writer Jim Jordan.
photo courtesy of Michael Varga.
An Independent Voter's Perspective on Current Political Divides
In the column, "Is Donald Trump Right?", Fulcrum Executive Editor, Hugo Balta, wrote:
For millions of Americans, President Trump’s second term isn’t a threat to democracy—it’s the fulfillment of a promise they believe was long overdue.
Is Donald Trump right?
Should the presidency serve as a force for disruption or a safeguard of preservation?
Balta invited readers to share their thoughts at newsroom@fulcrum.us.
David Levine from Portland, Oregon, shared these thoughts...
I am an independent voter who voted for Kamala Harris in the last election.
I pay very close attention to the events going on, and I try and avoid taking other people's opinions as fact, so the following writing should be looked at with that in mind:
Is Trump right? On some things, absolutely.
As to DEI, there is a strong feeling that you cannot fight racism with more racism or sexism with more sexism. Standards have to be the same across the board, and the idea that only white people can be racist is one that I think a lot of us find delusional on its face. The question is not whether we want equality in the workplace, but whether these systems are the mechanism to achieve it, despite their claims to virtue, and many of us feel they are not.
I think if the Democrats want to take back immigration as an issue then every single illegal alien no matter how they are discovered needs to be processed and sanctuary cities need to end, every single illegal alien needs to be found at that point Democrats could argue for an amnesty for those who have shown they have been Good actors for a period of time but the dynamic of simply ignoring those who break the law by coming here illegally is I think a losing issue for the Democrats, they need to bend the knee and make a deal.
I think you have to quit calling the man Hitler or a fascist because an actual fascist would simply shoot the protesters, the journalists, and anyone else who challenges him. And while he definitely has authoritarian tendencies, the Democrats are overplaying their hand using those words, and it makes them look foolish.
Most of us understand that the tariffs are a game of economic chicken, and whether it is successful or not depends on who blinks before the midterms. Still, the Democrats' continuous attacks on the man make them look disloyal to the country, not to Trump.
Referring to any group of people as marginalized is to many of us the same as referring to them as lesser, and it seems racist and insulting.
We invite you to read the opinions of other Fulrum Readers:
Trump's Policies: A Threat to Farmers and American Values
The Trump Era: A Bitter Pill for American Renewal
Federal Hill's Warning: A Baltimorean's Reflection on Leadership
Also, check out "Is Donald Trump Right?" and consider accepting Hugo's invitation to share your thoughts at newsroom@fulcrum.us.
The Fulcrum will select a range of submissions to share with readers as part of our ongoing civic dialogue.
We offer this platform for discussion and debate.