The attempted deportation of Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, met with dramatic and widespread resistance, is one of the first, high profile, specifically targeted repressive acts by the Trump regime, but it won’t be the last. There is no question about their intention to create a permanently repressive and dictatorial government, a government of, by and for the overwhelmingly white and male billionaire elite and those sucking up to them for their own personal gain.
Fortunately, this is not a popular government. Polls taken a few days ago by CNN, Reuters and Quinnipiac put Trump’s favorable ratings at an average of 44% and unfavorable ratings at 53%. On the economy CNN has him at 44-56%.
Trump’s declining popular support and the rise over the last 40 days of a powerful, visible, resistance movement that shows every sign that it will continue to grow and expand (April 5!) is part of why Trump spoke at the Justice Department two days ago.
His speech made clear the Trump intention to use the FBI, other federal agencies and the courts to try to silence those who oppose him. In the words of a Reuters story, “Trump has moved swiftly to exert control over the Justice Department (DOJ) since returning to office, challenging a decades-old tradition that the top U.S. law enforcement agency operates with a degree of independence from the White House.”
The Brennan Center for Justice released an analysis in late January of what Project 2025 put forward as far as how the DOJ should function under a Trump regime. Here is some of what they said:
Pam Bondi, Trump’s pick for attorney general, spent much of her Senate confirmation hearing attempting to allay concerns about the weaponization of the Justice Department, but she avoided direct questions about Trump’s pledge to prosecute specific adversaries. Trump has already signed two executive orders tasking the attorney general to conduct investigations into the previous administration. The politicization of the DOJ could occur in multiple ways.
While not explicitly outlined in Project 2025, removing barriers between the DOJ and the White House could allow the president to exert more control over individual prosecutors and investigators as they evaluate cases and choose whom to prosecute. The president campaigned on the promise of investigating and prosecuting those he perceived to be his rivals. Political appointees like the attorney general could be removed if they refuse to pursue politically motivated investigations…
The White House could assert more direct political influence on DOJ operations by removing expert civil servants, including people with decades of experience as prosecutors and investigators who have served under administrations of both parties. They could be replaced with ideological loyalists who lack key institutional knowledge that is essential for the daily operation of many law enforcement agencies. Indeed, dismissals and transfers of top justice department officials has already begun…
The relationship between the White House and the Justice Department envisioned by the authors of Project 2025 would breed a culture of impunity. Although the document does not touch on pardons, by bringing the DOJ under its close control, the White House could order officials to turn a blind eye to criminal behavior committed by friends of the administration. The combination of the promise of pardons and the presidential immunity granted by the Supreme Court increases this risk.
Successful Resistance
There are a number of things which are essential to successful resistance to government repression. When I say “successful” I don’t mean that there won’t be casualties on our side, people behind bars, some for months or years, or people physically attacked and injured or worse, or job losses or greater economic hardship. It is clear that under a Trump/MAGA regime this is all likely to some degree.
Several things which can lessen all of those negatives are these:
-good legal representation in court. It is good to see the way that many lawyers and progressive legal organizations are stepping up to challenge, in most cases successfully, the Trump executive orders issued so far;
-a loving community of support. This can be within an organization, within the local area where we live, via social media or other forms of communication, and/or just within a family. We all need to do our best to help foster and strengthen these necessary support networks;
-broad community support when repression happens. If people and groups that are attacked, in whatever way, are not seen as, or do not come to be known as, honest and genuine human beings trying to be a positive force, it is going to be hard to rally and manifest the breadth of support probably necessary. Indeed, if we are such people already, attacks on us can immediately or over time serve to undercut support for the repressors, strengthen our movement of movements.
I was a defendant in two major political trials during the Vietnam War, one in Harrisburg, Pa. and one in Rochester, NY. Because of the successful integration in both cases of good legal representation with effective community organizing leading to widespread and visible popular support, the Nixon Administration lost in the Harrisburg case and did poorly in the Rochester one. Though eight of us charged with six felonies were convicted there, a jury’s “recommendation of leniency” in sentencing and broad support within the Rochester community led to sentences of from one year to a year and a half. Prior to trial we fully expected to spend 5-10 years in prison because of what we had been caught doing overnight inside a federal building: destroying Selective Service files for young men about to be sent to Vietnam, finding incriminating documents within the (J. Edgar Hoover) FBI office and disrupting the offices of the US Attorney.
It is truly a lesson of history: politically smart and legally strong responses to attempted efforts to harass or jail us can immediately or over time serve to undercut support for the repressive government and strengthen our movement of movements. Si, se puede!