One Year of Resistance: Mobilizing Against Authoritarianism in America

Recent years have brought major changes to American politics, marked by rising executive power and growing claims that democracy is slipping away. Under the †®*mp regime, institutions designed to protect the balance of power and individual rights have been weakened by new policies and actions (Issue One, 2025; Jews United for Democracy, 2025; American Progress, 2025). This analysis draws from peer-reviewed research, legal records, and civil society reports to show how the regime has gathered more power for itself. The main argument is straightforward: these choices break with constitutional norms and put the basic foundations of American democracy at real risk.

“Executive Aggrandizement”: Centralization and Erosion of Democratic Safeguards

A growing feature of governance under the regime has been the expansion of executive power. Scholars note the repeated use of emergency declarations not tied to immediate national crises, instead used to avoid oversight and push regime priorities (Issue One, 2025). Several watchdog roles, like inspectors general, have been stripped of power or eliminated, and experienced civil servants replaced with loyalists lacking proper qualifications (Jews United for Democracy, 2025; American Progress, 2025).

Legal experts say these moves violate both the spirit and the letter of the constitutional separation of powers. In recent sessions, executive orders have overridden laws passed by Congress, while Congress itself has struggled to exercise its powers over budgets and investigations (Issue One, 2025; Voting Rights Lab, 2025). Research shows these trends echo other global examples of democracies weakening (International IDEA, 2025).

Defenders of the regime claim these steps improve efficiency and respond to necessity. But the prevailing view among legal scholars is that weakening these safeguards both causes and signals the rise of “competitive authoritarianism”—a label now applied to the U.S. by key democracy observers (Carnegie Endowment, 2025). The regime’s power grab has diminished the checks and balances designed to protect American democracy.

Assault on the Free Press and Civil Discourse

Attacks on the free press have grown under the regime, breaking from the American tradition that treats independent journalism as vital to democracy. Recent steps by the regime show a clear plan to weaken the press, silence dissent, and shape the public narrative to its liking (ACLU, 2025; Congress.gov, 2025; PBS, 2025). Lawmakers responded in May 2025 with resolutions condemning these actions, calling press freedom essential to accountability and basic rights (Congress.gov, 2025).

The regime’s approach mixes direct pressure with legal maneuvers. It has repeatedly accused major outlets such as The Washington Post, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and MSNBC of “illegal” activity and claimed they operate as “political arms of the Democrat Party” (ACLU, 2025; Congress.gov, 2025). In one notable case, the Associated Press was removed from the White House press pool after refusing to use the regime’s preferred language. A court later restored its access, but the delay marked a rare moment when the executive branch directly controlled press credentials, which is something not seen in generations (ACLU, 2025).

Legal action has become another tool. The regime has filed lawsuits against networks such as CBS, claiming political bias and pushing to revoke broadcast licenses. The effort has also spread to public outlets like NPR and PBS, threatening their funding and independence through defunding orders and regulatory investigations (Congress.gov, 2025; NPR, 2025; PBS, 2025). Executive orders have directed the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to stop supporting media programs that do not align with regime priorities, especially those maintaining diversity and inclusion work (Congress.gov, 2025). Under that same pressure, the Federal Communications Commission has opened investigations into major broadcasters and limited who can attend briefings, even excluding journalists who include pronouns in their communications (International Bar Association, 2025).

International observers warn that these patterns do not stop at national borders. Groups such as Reporters Without Borders and Deutsche Welle point out that the weakening of U.S. press freedom encourages authoritarian leaders elsewhere to suppress journalists with less fear of criticism (DW, 2025; RSF, 2025). The problem has already reached U.S.-funded international outlets, where funding cuts and staff dismissals have stalled reporting projects and reduced advocacy for detained journalists abroad. Congressional reports show over 3,500 media jobs at risk and at least eleven American-supported journalists now detained overseas without strong government intervention (Congress.gov, 2025).

Legal experts say these measures violate clear First Amendment protections (ACLU, 2025; Human Rights Research, 2025). Lawsuits, credential denials, and funding restrictions have made reporters think twice before publishing critical stories. The result is a colder media climate where investigative reporting has slowed, editorial independence has narrowed, and public trust is harder to maintain (Human Rights Research, 2025).

The effects go beyond journalism. A free press is one of the most powerful checks on corruption and abuse of power. When that independence weakens, civic awareness suffers, and the system that holds officials accountable starts to erode (Harvard Kennedy School, 2025; RSF, 2025). The regime’s campaign against reporters, whistleblowers, and independent media funding does not just silence criticism. It strikes at the very foundation of American democracy (ACLU, 2025; Congress.gov, 2025; RSF, 2025).

Systematic Suppression of Voting Rights

The regime has introduced a series of changes that together have weakened voting rights and limited equal access to the ballot. These steps are well documented in recent reports by legal scholars, journalists, and nonpartisan advocacy groups (Brennan Center for Justice, 2024; Voting Rights Lab, 2025; Civil Rights.org, 2025). Over the past year, both federal and state policies tied to the regime have reshaped the American voting landscape, making it harder for many citizens to cast their votes.

A key element of the plan has been the spread of strict voter identification laws and the large-scale removal of voters from state rolls. Since 2024, with federal encouragement, several legislatures have passed measures requiring multiple forms of ID, limiting the use of provisional ballots, and using automated systems to cancel voter registrations. These cross-check systems often misidentify voters and disproportionately affect minority, elderly, and rural communities (Brennan Center for Justice, 2024; Voting Rights Lab, 2025). Though billed as efforts to fight fraud, these laws have disenfranchised many eligible voters and sharply reduced turnout in several swing states.

Federal pressure on state election systems has also grown. Department of Justice attorneys, acting under regime directives, have advised states to ignore court rulings that struck down voting restrictions as unconstitutional (Voting Rights Lab, 2025). At the same time, the regime has targeted state and local election workers with investigations and criminal charges for expanding ballot access or disputing illegal restrictions (Civil Rights.org, 2025). Congressional hearings have noted that this pressure has led many election officials to resign, leaving fewer experienced, nonpartisan administrators to run elections fairly.

Scholars now describe the United States as moving toward a “competitive authoritarian” model, where elections still occur but are shaped by state control and reduced transparency (Carnegie Endowment, 2025; International IDEA, 2025). The rollback of early voting, closure of polling stations in minority areas, and harsher penalties for routine election errors have hit Black, Latino, Native American, and younger voters the hardest (Civil Rights.org, 2025; Harvard Kennedy School, 2025). Together, these factors narrow participation and tilt the system toward one-party dominance.

In response, a broad coalition of civil rights groups, legal experts, and local activists has mobilized to resist these changes. Lawsuits, policy campaigns, and voter outreach efforts have challenged the new restrictions and worked to rebuild confidence in the process (ACLU, 2025; Brennan Center for Justice, 2024). Some court injunctions have paused the harshest measures, but most observers agree that the overall direction points to deeper erosion of the basic right to vote (Jews United for Democracy, 2025; International IDEA, 2025).

The broader effect is clear: declining trust in election results has weakened public faith in the democratic system itself. Studies show that when people lose confidence that votes are counted fairly, civic participation falls, and political polarization deepens (International IDEA, 2025; Harvard Kennedy School, 2025). What began as a set of technical rule changes has become a serious challenge to the idea of representative government in the United States.

Repression through Immigration Policy

Immigration policy under the regime has grown harsher, marked by policies that domestic and international observers describe as violations of civil and human rights (Human Rights First, 2025; American Community Media, 2025; ACLU, 2025). These shifts have deeply changed the experiences of immigrants, asylum seekers, and refugees both at the border and within the United States.

A central pattern has been the expanded use of long-term detention and an alarming rise in enforced disappearances. Human rights groups documented at least nineteen deaths and more than one thousand disappearances from immigration custody in 2025 alone (American Community Media, 2025). Families, lawyers, and advocates often cannot locate detained individuals, and even international monitors report being denied access to basic records (Human Rights First, 2025). In several documented cases, detainees have been secretly transferred to prisons in countries including El Salvador, Costa Rica, and Panama – moves that bypass established legal procedures and strip individuals of protection under U.S. law (Human Rights First, 2025).

Inside domestic detention centers, solitary confinement has become both more common and more prolonged. Medical professionals, legal experts, and international bodies have condemned the practice for causing severe psychological harm (ICIJ, 2025). Records show that people are often held in isolation without due process and for longer periods than ever before, highlighting a growing disregard for basic humanitarian standards.

Legal and investigative findings also show that the regime has singled out particularly vulnerable groups–pregnant women, families with children, and even legal permanent residents–for aggressive enforcement and fast-track deportations (ACLU, 2025; Civil Rights.org, 2025). Policy changes have narrowed access to asylum protections, leaving many credible fear interviews delayed or denied without explanation or recourse.

Government and independent data further indicate that many detainees are held in facilities operating with little transparency or oversight (American Community Media, 2025; ICIJ, 2025). The refusal to allow inspections or comply with records requests from lawmakers and journalists has blocked meaningful public scrutiny, allowing abuses to persist unchecked.

Experts in international law have noted that these patterns align with the global definition of enforced disappearance, a violation prohibited by several human rights treaties that the United States has endorsed (Human Rights First, 2025). The United Nations and other human rights institutions have expressed growing concern and called for immediate corrective steps.

Public reaction has crossed political and social boundaries. Civil society groups, religious organizations, and bipartisan coalitions of former officials have condemned these policies as unlawful and inhumane. Ongoing court challenges question their constitutionality, particularly their conflict with due process and equal protection guarantees (ACLU, 2025; American Progress, 2025).

Taken together, the regime’s immigration agenda has led to widespread loss of rights, preventable deaths, and a troubling normalization of disappearances. Beyond the legal violations, these developments pose serious moral and humanitarian questions about the nation’s commitment to basic human dignity.

Weaponization of Governance and Law

A central feature of the regime has been its use of government machinery and legal systems to consolidate power, suppress dissent, and shield loyalists from accountability. This strategy distorts the purpose of American institutions, weakening the safeguards that keep political influence in check (American Progress, 2025; Jews United for Democracy, 2025; Issue One, 2025).

The regime has built this control by valuing loyalty over expertise in key appointments. Across the Department of Justice, federal regulatory agencies, and the civil service, nonpartisan professionals have been replaced with individuals chosen for allegiance rather than competence (Issue One, 2025). The shift has eroded the independence of agencies that exist to enforce laws, regulate industry, and protect the public interest.

Lawmakers and researchers now describe growing “legislative capture,” where executive actions overshadow the legislative process. The regime has frequently used executive orders and opaque procedural tactics to bypass debate and avoid oversight. In turn, Congress has struggled to enforce subpoenas, hold hearings, or compel testimony, as regime officials often ignore or delay compliance (Jews United for Democracy, 2025; Voting Rights Lab, 2025). Together, these moves have tipped the constitutional balance between the branches of government.

Another sign of this broader weaponization is the use of law enforcement and federal military resources for political purposes. Civil liberties groups report that federal agents have been deployed against peaceful protests and that regime critics face selective prosecution while aligned figures enjoy protection (Harvard Kennedy School, 2025; Civil Rights.org, 2025). Whistleblower protections have also weakened, with complaints suppressed and staff who report misconduct facing retaliation instead of justice (Issue One, 2025).

Pressure on the judiciary reflects a similar trend. Investigations show efforts to influence both sitting judges and judicial nominees to favor interpretations of law that align with regime interests (American Progress, 2025). Congressional records and media reports describe coordinated campaigns designed to shape rulings on issues such as executive power and voting rights.

The outcome is a growing climate of fear and instability within government institutions and the wider public. Legal experts warn that when laws are applied selectively to punish some and protect others, the principle of equal justice collapses (Jews United for Democracy, 2025; Issue One, 2025). International organizations note that this pattern mirrors democratic decline seen in other nations where accountability gives way to power consolidation (International IDEA, 2025).

Consequences: Marginalization, Division, and the Erosion of Public Trust

The steady weakening of democratic institutions under the regime has left clear marks on American society. The consequences reach across marginalized communities, the broader social structure, and the foundations of public trust in government. Political scientists place this decline within the global wave of democratic backsliding but note that the pace and intensity of the American case are unusually severe (Carnegie Endowment, 2025; Brookings Institution, 2025).

The most visible impact has been on vulnerable groups: minorities, immigrants, low-income families, and outspoken critics. New laws, administrative orders, and selective enforcement have increased the risk of detention, loss of voting rights, and exposure to political violence (Civil Rights.org, 2025; Human Rights First, 2025; American Community Media, 2025). The regime’s use of executive power to punish perceived opponents has expanded beyond politics, cutting access to public resources and creating widespread fear and psychological distress (Carnegie Endowment, 2025; Brookings Institution, 2025).

Core democratic norms such as tolerance and restraint have also eroded. Research documents a growing refusal among regime officials and supporters to recognize opposing voices as legitimate participants in democratic life (Democratic-Erosion.org, 2025; Verfassungsblog, 2025). The result has been a rise in political hostility, threats against public servants, and a flood of conspiracy narratives that drown out reasoned public debate (CNN, 2025; Freedom House, 2024). Bipartisan negotiation, once a stabilizing force, has nearly disappeared under the strain of mistrust.

Public confidence in key institutions, especially elections and the courts, has fallen sharply. The sense that government can act fairly has been weakened by executive actions granting allies immunity while directing prosecutors toward critics (Carnegie Endowment, 2025; Brookings Institution, 2025). The regime’s moves to question past election outcomes and pardon individuals involved in political violence have deepened concerns about equal justice and the rule of law (Brookings Institution, 2025; Democratic-Erosion.org, 2025).

Together, these developments reveal a system where democratic norms have weakened faster than anyone expected, and where restoring trust may take far longer than the damage did to unfold.

Economic analyses have highlighted related trends:

• Economic research mirrors the political and social trends tied to the regime’s rise. Analysts point to a growing concentration of both political and financial power among regime-aligned elites, a shift that has widened inequality, disrupted investment in public services, and weakened confidence in the business climate (Brookings Institution, 2025). Comparative studies show that these patterns resemble those seen in other competitive authoritarian systems, where declining public trust often leads to unstable markets and lower social mobility (Carnegie Endowment, 2025; Brookings Institution, 2025).

The combined effect of these policies has been a climate of anxiety and withdrawal among many citizens. Communities already vulnerable to repression feel the strain most acutely, as fear replaces participation and resignation takes the place of civic engagement. When people lose faith in the fairness of representation or the integrity of institutions, democratic governance itself begins to falter (Carnegie Endowment, 2025; Freedom House, 2024; Harvard Kennedy School, 2025). The erosion of both economic opportunity and public trust reveals that the damage extends beyond policy. It reaches the core of how citizens relate to their government.

Recommendations for Democratic Renewal

Reversing the country’s democratic decline will require action at every level—from legislators and judges to civil society and the broader public. Recent research points to a coordinated approach that restores institutional independence, strengthens constitutional limits, and rebuilds public trust in democracy (Harvard Kennedy School, 2025; Brookings Institution, 2025; Civil Rights.org, 2025).

A top priority is legislative reform that rebalances power through real oversight. Congress should reassert its authority by clarifying the scope of emergency powers, restoring its budgetary and investigative functions, and setting firmer limits on executive discretion (Issue One, 2025; Jews United for Democracy, 2025). Protecting inspectors general, enhancing transparency, and defending whistleblowers are essential steps to keep government accountable and fair (Harvard Kennedy School, 2025; Brookings Institution, 2025).

Judicial independence is another cornerstone of renewal. Court appointments must be based on legal merit and constitutional integrity rather than political loyalty. To safeguard impartiality, funding for the judiciary should be insulated from partisan pressure, and both legislative and executive branches must honor judicial rulings, especially those involving civil rights and elections (American Progress, 2025; Jews United for Democracy, 2025; Voting Rights Lab, 2025).

Rebuilding a strong and independent press also matters. Expanding public grants, strengthening legal protections for journalists, and defending the right to investigate government actions are vital to restoring transparency (ACLU, 2025; PBS, 2025). Civil society organizations can play a parallel role by documenting abuses, educating communities, and supporting individuals harmed by political repression (Civil Rights.org, 2025).

Renewing democracy depends just as much on expanding access and equality. Reforms must guarantee every eligible citizen the means to participate, through fair voting procedures, accessible legal aid, healthcare, and education (Brennan Center for Justice, 2024; American Community Media, 2025).

Grassroots movements and advocacy groups are key to challenging discriminatory laws and rebuilding civil liberties through litigation, protest, and public awareness (ACLU, 2025; Human Rights First, 2025).

Finally, democratic resilience cannot survive without engaged citizens. Educators, community organizations, and media leaders all help sustain civic understanding and accountability through active participation and open dialogue (Brookings Institution, 2025; Freedom House, 2024). Comparative evidence shows that societies facing similar crises have restored democracy through persistent activism, collective advocacy, and reform grounded in law and principle (International IDEA, 2025).

The future of American democracy, as history suggests, depends on vigilance, moral courage, and the shared will of citizens and institutions to uphold the rule of law.

Proven Advocacy Approaches to Democracy Restoration

Recent global experience offers valuable lessons on how societies have resisted or reversed authoritarian consolidation. Across regions and historical moments, certain advocacy strategies have consistently proven effective in strengthening democratic institutions and renewing public trust. The examples outlined below reflect findings from scholarship, policy research, and historical record.

• Broad-Based Prodemocracy Movements

  Mass, nonviolent mobilization has been one of the most powerful tools for democratic change. During the “Third Wave” of democratization, described by Huntington (1991), grassroots movements in the Philippines (1986) and South Korea (1987) used sustained, peaceful protests to pressure authoritarian governments into holding free elections and enacting reforms. In Eastern Europe, coalitions of advocacy groups, labor unions, and religious institutions organized across ideological lines. Their coordinated civic action, supported by international engagement, dismantled entrenched regimes and opened space for new democratic institutions (Freedom House, 2023; Huntington, 1991).

• Legislative and Legal Reform

  Legislative activism has been critical in expanding democracy within established states. During the U.S. Progressive Era (1890s–1920s), reform coalitions advanced direct elections, initiatives, referenda, and recall powers, culminating in constitutional amendments such as women’s suffrage (1919) and the direct election of senators (1913). Grassroots advocates sustained pressure through public campaigns and cross-partisan alliances that persisted over multiple election cycles (Wikipedia, 2004; Gilder Lehrman Institute, 2000). Similar persistence later shaped landmark legislation such as the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Democracy Restoration Act, both secured through litigation, coalition organizing, and federal support for equitable voting access (Social Work Blog, 2023).

• Building Accountability and Transparency Institutions

  Post-authoritarian transitions in Latin America and Eastern Europe underscore the role of independent oversight bodies, reformed ombuds offices, and expanded whistleblower protections in stabilizing democracies (Carnegie Endowment, 2022; American Progress, 2024). Successful advocacy campaigns have also targeted campaign finance transparency and anti-gerrymandering reform. Efforts like the For the People Act in the United States used petitions, legal challenges, and civic education to strengthen electoral fairness and restore public confidence (Brennan Center for Justice, 2024).

• Media Freedom and the Protection of Civic Space

  Free and independent media remain at the core of any democratic renewal. Investigative journalism and public broadcasting provide accountability, uncover abuses, and empower citizens with information. In Tunisia (2011) and Ukraine (2004, 2014), advocacy for media independence and coordinated networks of reporters, activists, and watchdog groups proved essential for mobilizing citizens and legitimizing transitions (Freedom House, 2023; Carnegie Endowment, 2022).

• International Support and Learning

  Global experience also suggests that external actors are most effective when they empower, rather than direct, local reform movements. Diplomatic coordination, targeted sanctions, and technical support can promote democratic development only when rooted in the leadership and strategies of local civil society (Huntington, 1991; Defense Priorities, 2025). Enduring progress has come from coalitions that balance international assistance with community-based leadership and accountability.

Effective Democratic Advocacy: Lessons from Global History

Across history and in modern contexts, certain advocacy strategies have proven especially effective in defending or rebuilding democratic systems under pressure. Drawn from a range of global experiences, these approaches share a focus on unity, persistence, and locally driven action.

• Broad Coalitions Across Ideological and Social Groups

  Successful democratic transitions often emerge from inclusive coalitions that cross political, ethnic, religious, and class boundaries. By emphasizing shared democratic principles instead of partisan identities, such movements create unified opposition to authoritarian power (Freedom House, 2023; Huntington, 1991). Both the Velvet Revolution in Eastern Europe and the People Power movement in the Philippines illustrate how alliances among civic organizations, clergy, and moderate political leaders can sustain pressure on entrenched regimes and open space for reform.

• Nonviolent Mass Mobilization

  Peaceful, sustained mobilization remains one of the most effective ways to challenge authoritarian authority. Protests, strikes, and acts of civil disobedience not only draw local participation but also attract global attention, limiting the legitimacy of violent repression (Huntington, 1991; Carnegie Endowment, 2022). In recent years, movements such as Taiwan’s Sunflower Movement and Tunisia’s Jasmine Revolution have shown how social media and digital coordination can amplify nonviolent organizing and sustain momentum for democratic change (Bosch Stiftung, 2022).

• Legal and Legislative Advocacy

  Legal and policy reform efforts have long anchored democratic advancement. During the U.S. Progressive Era, campaigns for women’s suffrage and direct senatorial elections succeeded through years of litigation, public education, and grassroots lobbying (Wikipedia, 2004; Gilder Lehrman Institute, 2000). Present-day reforms in campaign finance and voting rights draw on similar strategies, combining legal action with broad coalition-building among civic and advocacy organizations (Brennan Center, 2024).

• Independent Journalism and Information Freedom

  An informed public is essential for accountable governance. Strengthening independent media and protecting journalists have been central to post-authoritarian recoveries worldwide. In post-apartheid South Africa and several post-Soviet states, media reforms and cross-border journalist networks have helped uncover corruption, build civic awareness, and reinforce public confidence in democratic systems (Freedom House, 2023; Carnegie Endowment, 2022).

• International Partnership and Local Ownership

  External support is most effective when it works through, not over, local leadership. Diplomatic engagement, technical assistance, and targeted funding can reinforce democratic culture when aligned with local movements that understand the context and risks of reform (Defense Priorities, 2025; Huntington, 1991). Sustainable democracy grows when outside actors back existing civic efforts rather than impose external models.

Taken together, these approaches form a kind of global toolkit for democratic renewal. Unity across diverse groups, commitment to nonviolence, reliance on law and institutions, protection of a free press, and respect for local leadership remain the essential elements of any lasting effort to restore democratic governance.

The Imperative of Vigilant Democratic Engagement

The regime’s tightening grip on power shows a clear attack on the foundations of American democracy. The separation of powers, a free press, fair voting rights, and the rule of law. All have been weakened. These shifts mirror global patterns of democratic decline and pose an immediate threat to the nation’s system of checks and balances (Carnegie Endowment, 2025; Brookings Institution, 2025).

History proves that democracy can fight back. Authoritarian control can be reversed through organized, steady, and principled action. The most effective ways include building broad coalitions, uniting across differences, protesting peacefully, passing protective laws, defending the free press, and supporting local groups working to preserve democratic values (Huntington, 1991; Freedom House, 2023; Brennan Center, 2024). These actions have restored freedom before – and can again.

Democracy only survives when people defend it. Laws and institutions mean little without citizens who demand accountability and honesty from leaders. Every part of society has a role to play—activists, judges, journalists, lawmakers, and everyday people who choose to stay informed and engaged.

Right now, the country stands at a turning point. The choice is between action or surrender, vigilance or silence. Each moment of hesitation only strengthens those who wish to hold power without limits. The urgency could not be clearer.

• To citizens: Vote in every election. Speak out. Demand truth and fairness from those in charge. Join community efforts that protect rights and liberty.

  
  

• To lawmakers: Defend democratic checks and balances. Pass laws that protect voting access, support open government, and hold power accountable.

  
  

• To activists and advocates: Keep organizing, educating, and challenging abuses of power through lawful and united action.

  
  

• To the media: Report the truth with courage. Expose wrongdoing and stand firm for journalistic independence.

  
  

• To institutions: Uphold justice and the rule of law. Protect whistleblowers and preserve transparency at every level.

Democracy is not guaranteed. It depends on each generation choosing to defend it. The threat of authoritarianism is real, and the stakes are nothing less than freedom itself. This is the time to act: to speak out, to organize, to vote, and to stand firm together. If we do not, others will decide the future for us.

References

ACLU. (2025, November 12). †®*mp’s attempt to roll back key civil rights-enforcement tool. https://aclu.org

American Community Media. (2025, October 20). Death, disappearance, neglect escalate in U.S. immigrant detention. https://americancommunitymedia.org/immigration/death-disappearance-neglect-escalate-in-u-s-immigrant-detention-camps/

American Progress. (2025, September 18). A green light for authoritarianism: How the †®*mp regime continues to undermine democracy. https://americanprogress.org

Bosch Stiftung. (2022). Exploring worldwide democratic innovations: A series of case studies. Robert Bosch Stiftung. https://bosch-stiftung.de

Brennan Center for Justice. (2024). The For the People Act: Democracy reform. https://brennancenter.org

Brennan Center for Justice. (2024, August 22). Project 2025’s anti-voter agenda. https://brennancenter.org

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. (2022, September 14). Five strategies to support U.S. democracy. https://carnegieendowment.org

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. (2025, August 24). U.S. democratic backsliding in comparative perspective. https://carnegieendowment.org

Civil Rights.org. (2025, September 3). †®*mp regime civil and human rights rollbacks. https://civilrights.org (https://civilrights.org/trump-rollbacks/)

Congress.gov. (2025, May 5). S.Res.205 - 119th Congress (2025–2026): A resolution condemning attacks on the press. https://congress.gov

Defense Priorities. (2025, November 6). At the end of its tether: U.S. grand strategy of advancing democracy. https://defensepriorities.org

Freedom House. (2023, January 31). Marking 50 years in the struggle for democracy. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2023/marking-50-years

Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. (2000). Theodore Roosevelt and the themes of progressive reform. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/essays/square-deal-theodore-roosevelt-and-themes-progressive-reform

Harvard Kennedy School. (2025, February 5). Democracy in the shadow of the global rise in authoritarian populism. https://hks.harvard.edu

Human Rights First. (2025, June 10). The †®*mp regime is forcibly disappearing migrants. https://humanrightsfirst.org/the-trump-administration-is-forcibly-disappearing-migrants/

Huntington, S. P. (1991). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. University of Oklahoma Press.

ICIJ. (2025, September 18). Solitary confinement in IÇE detention spiked during early months of 2025. https://www.icij.org/news/2025/09/solitary-confinement-in-ice-detention-spiked-during-early-months-of-the-trump-administration-report-finds/

International IDEA. (2025, August 22). The global state of democracy 2025. https://www.idea.int/events/global-state-democracy-2025-democracy-move-global-launch-event

Issue One. (2025, July 20). New Issue One report chronicles pattern of executive overreach and unchecked power. https://issueone.org

Jews United for Democracy. (2025, March 10). The limits of executive power: Examining constitutional authority. https://jewsunitedfordemocracy.org

NPR. (2025, May 4). †®*mp’s impact on U.S. press freedoms. https://npr.org (https://www.npr.org/2025/05/05/nx-s1-5384970/press-freedom-no-longer-a-given-in-u-s-according-to-cpj-report)

PBS. (2025, September 18). †®*mp’s moves against media outlets mirror authoritarian tactics. https://pbs.org (https://www.pbs.org/video/brooks-and-capehart-on-censorship-and-authoritarianism-1758322064/)

Social Work Blog. (2023, July 27). The Democracy Restoration Act is a civil and voting rights imperative. https://socialworkblog.org (https://www.socialworkblog.org/advocacy/social-justice-advocacy/2023/07/the-democracy-restoration-act-a-civil-and-voting-rights-imperative/)

Voting Rights Lab. (2025, November 3). 2025 legislative sessions to date: Key election policy trends. https://votingrightslab.org

Wikipedia. (2004). Progressive Era. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era