Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Is the U.S. Heading to a Police State? Trump Executive Orders and Project 2025 Raise Alarms

Opinion

Is the U.S. Heading to a Police State? Trump Executive Orders and Project 2025 Raise Alarms
Protesters confront California National Guard soldiers and police outside of a federal building as protests continue in Los Angeles following three days of clashes with police after a series of immigration raids on June 09, 2025 in Los Angeles, California.
Getty Images, David McNew

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.


Read More

For Trump, the State of the Union is delusional

U.S. President Donald Trump, with Vice President JD Vance and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson looking on, delivers his State of the Union address during a Joint Session of Congress at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump delivered his address days after the Supreme Court struck down the administration's tariff strategy and amid a U.S.


(Getty Images)

For Trump, the State of the Union is delusional

State of the Union speeches haven’t mattered in a while. Even in their heyday, they were only bringing in 60-plus million viewers, and that’s been declining substantially for decades. They rarely result in a post-speech bump for any president, and according to Gallup polling data since 1978, the average change in a president’s approval rating has been less than one percentage point in either direction.

To be sure, this is good news for President Trump. He should hope and pray this State of the Union was lightly watched.

Keep ReadingShow less
The spectacle of Operation Epic Fury
A general view of Tehran with smoke visible in the distance after explosions were reported in the city, on March 02, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.
(Photo by Contributor/Getty Images)

The spectacle of Operation Epic Fury

The U.S. and Israel’s joint military campaign against Iran, which rolled out under the name Operation Epic Fury, is a phrase that sounds more like a summer action film than a real‑world conflict in which people are dying. The operation involves massive strikes across Iran, with U.S. Central Command reporting that more than 1,700 targets have been hit in the first 72 hours. President Donald Trump described it as a “massive and ongoing operation” aimed at dismantling Iran’s military capabilities.

This framing matters. When leaders adopt language that emphasizes spectacle, they risk shifting public perception away from the gravity of war. The death of Iran’s supreme leader following the bombardment, for example, was a world‑altering event, yet it unfolded under a banner that evokes adrenaline rather than anguish.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Race and Species are Leveraged Against Each Other

Texas Rep. Al Green held a sign reading "Black People Aren't Apes," protesting a racist video Trump had previously shared on Truth Social. Green was escorted out of the House chamber just minutes into President Donald Trump's State of the Union address.

How Race and Species are Leveraged Against Each Other

This was nothing new.

Before President Donald Trump released a video on his Truth Social account earlier this month that depicted Michelle and Barack Obama as apes, many were already well aware of his compulsive use of AI-generated deepfake content to disparage the former president. Many were also well aware of his tendency to employ dehumanizing rhetoric to describe people of color.

Keep ReadingShow less
President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressing congress, December 8, 1941.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressing congress, December 8, 1941.

Getty Images, Fotosearch

Four Freedoms: What We Are Fighting For

The record of the Trump 2.0 administration is one of repeated usurpations and injuries to the body politic: fundamentally at odds with the principles of democracy, without legal or ethical restraint, hostile to truth, and indifferent to human suffering. Our nation desperately needs a stout and engaging response from the party out-of-power. It’s necessary but not sufficient for Democrats to criticize Trump, rehearsing what they are against. If it is to generate renewed enthusiasm among voters, the Democratic Party must offer a compelling positive message, stating clearly what it stands for.

Fortunately, Democrats don’t need to reinvent this wheel. They can reach back to a fraught moment in our history when a president brought forward a timely and nationally unifying message, framed within a coherent, memorable, and inspiring set of ideas. In his address to Congress on Jan. 6, 1941 – a full 12 months before Pearl Harbor – Franklin Delano Roosevelt termed the international spread of fascism an “unprecedented” threat to U.S. security. He also identified dangers on the home front: powerful isolationist leanings and, in certain quarters, popular support for Nazi ideology. Calling for increased military preparation and war production (along with higher taxes), he reminded citizens “what the downfall of democratic nations [abroad] might mean to our own democracy.”

Keep ReadingShow less