The SAVE America Act: The consequences of restrictive voting

Attacks on voting eligibility 

The Republicans in Congress recently proposed the SAVE Act, a bill requiring proof of citizenship at the time of voter registration, along with photograph ID. This is accepted through proof of passport, and use of birth certificate. It is not disputed that citizen registration protections are important, but there are numerous other ways to ensure transparency that “don’t create new barriers for eligible voters.” (Bipartisan Policy, 2026).

This new policy sounds effective, but lacks context. In the 2024 election, noncitizen voting made up only 10 thousandths of a percent of the popular vote (Cato Institute, 2026). Noncitizen voting is not a significant issue. Noncitizen voting does not sway elections. Effective protections are already in place. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act was implemented in 1993 and has done its job for decades. This act explicitly prohibits noncitizens from voting. A 2025 Time article, discussed how only 277 noncitizen ballots have been found since 2020. For reference, around 150 million people vote each election year. 

Although this act would decrease the already minimal amount of noncitizen ballots, it would prevent millions of Americans from being able to vote. Research published by the Brennan Center for Justice found that half of Americans do not have a passport and around 21 million Americans lack access to a passport or birth certificate. This number does not take into account the additional difficulties presented to married women whose last names do not match that on their birth certificates or passports. This bill creates hurdles preventing the freedom to vote, lengthening the process unnecessarily (Hansen & Burns, 2026). Democracy is most effective when all people can participate. According to the Center for American Progress (2026), these plans “would be an unprecedented move in U.S. history and an illegal attempt to interfere with the right to vote of American citizens across the nation” (para. 6). By denying access to voting rights to millions of Americans, Trump is threatening democracy to solve a nonexistent problem. 

Bibliography

Burns, E. (2025, February 5). What You Need to Know About the SAVE Act. Campaign Legal Center. https://campaignlegal.org/update/what-you-need-know-about-save-act

Greene, C. (2026, February 27). Trump Keeps Railing Against Non-Citizen Voting. Research Shows It’s Extremely Rare. TIME; Time. https://time.com/7381495/trump-non-citizen-voter-fraud-claims-research-immigration/

Miller, M. (2026, February 27). The SAVE America Act Explained: How the New “Show Your Papers” Voting Bill Is Even More Extreme Than the SAVE Act. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-save-america-act-explained-how-the-new-show-your-papers-voting-bill-is-even-more-extreme-than-the-save-act/

Orey, Brown, Oyola, & Menon. (2024, March 13). Four Things to Know about Noncitizen Voting. Bipartisan Policy Center. https://bipartisanpolicy.org/article/four-things-to-know-about-noncitizen-voting/

Trump’s Claims About Noncitizens Voting Are False. We Can Prove It. (2026, February 5). Cato Institute. https://www.cato.org/commentary/trumps-claims-about-noncitizens-voting-are-false-we-can-prove-it‌‌‌

Political Polarization and how it undermines democratic legitimacy

Political Polarization

Political Polarization is defined as an increasing ideological and cultural divide between political parties. In modern times, political polarization plagues the global geopolitical climate. In America, polarization is especially concerning. According to a 2025 article published by Syracuse University, Americans are more divided today than they have been since the civil war (Stirling). This claim is reinforced by data from the Pew Research Center, with their polls highlighting the intense partisan divide between Americans. According to their poll, a staggering 83% of Democrats opined that Republicans are close-minded, 72% of Republicans claimed democrats are more immoral than other Americans, and 62% of Republicans think that Democrats are lazy (Pew Research Center, 2022). 

Trump and Polarization

The European Center for Populism Studies describes how this divergence is incredibly threatening to the stability of a nation. In their words, polarization influences the constituents to view “the opposing camp and its policies as an existential threat to their way of life or the nation as a whole” (ECPS, n.d.). This same article describes how polarization can encourage extremism, internal conflict, prevent nuance, and give rise to strong leaders. Strong leaders can profit off of division, and can use their opposing party as a scapegoat for political crises. Two authors from the Journal The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Alan Abramowitz and Jennifer McCoy, explain how racial, ideological, and cultural polarization promoted the success of Trump in the 2016 election, and polarizing ideals have been a backbone of his campaign since his initial victory. The Democratic Erosion Consortium says that “Trump is using affective polarization to amplify his platform and break democratic norms” (Ortiz, 2025). This is done through white nationalist sentiment that targets immigrants and democrats as the root cause of the American decline. Any rhetoric that paints a singular party as less than, or immoral, can create serious anti-democratic sentiment that only widens the ideological party gap. Trump has also continued to push anti-establishment views on his voters, discouraging trust in existing institutions, and fueling divisions. He has profited off of divisiveness and used polarization to help expand his platform (Segal, 2024). Trump has said things like, “We should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military”, “America is under invasion from within”, affordability is a “democrat scam” and has continuously blamed the “radical left” for political upheavals (Adams, 2025). 

Polarization and its threat to democracy 

Democracy thrives on open conversation, mutual understanding, and nuance. Polarization discourages all of this. As partisan politics expands, mutual understanding declines. A hostile political environment can prevent true diplomacy and can exacerbate already existing conflict. Jennifer McCoy, a renowned political science professor and author at Georgia State University directly asserts that “Severe polarization makes democracy vulnerable” (McCoy, n.d). A plethora of research validates this claim. A 2021 comparative evidence study by Yunus Ohran found that political polarization increases support for undemocratic candidates, weakening democratic institutions and encouraging backsliding. Another research paper, published by Druckman, Green, & Iyengar (2024) similarly produced results concluding that polarization weakens democracy and makes functional governance more difficult. 

Conclusion 

These are not isolated works. Political scientists globally have found that polarization is harmful to democratic institutions, and divisive leaders reverse the foundations of governance Americans find so dear and true. It is important to draw connections between patterns, and leaders. The scholars asserting that Trump is a divisive and polarizing figure, and the researchers proving that polarization accelerates democratic decline, creates an interesting relationship that further emphasizes the need for government accountability and skepticism to the actions of the Trump administration. Democratic preservation is essential to the wellbeing of American citizens, and by encouraging political polarization and continuing to paint the left of his enemy, Trump is contributing to the collapse of institutions on a national scale. 

Bibliography

Druckman, J. N., Green, D. P., & Iyengar, S. (2023). Does Affective Polarization Contribute to Democratic Backsliding in America? ˜the œAnnals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science/˜the œAnnals, 708(1), 137–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027162241228952 

European Center for Populism Studies. (2023). Political Polarization. European Center for Populism Studies. https://www.populismstudies.org/Vocabulary/political-polarization/ 

McCoy, J. (2019). Polarization harms democracy and society. Peace in Progress Magazine. https://www.icip.cat/perlapau/en/article/polarization-harms-democracy-and-society/ 

Pew Research Center. (2022, August 9). 5. Republicans and Democrats Increasingly Critical of People in the Opposing Party. Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/08/09/republicans-and-democrats-increasingly-critical-of-people-in-the-opposing-party/ 

Segal, J. (2025). Donald Trump: Source and Symptom of Polarization. 16(1). https://doi.org/10.5206/sc.v16i1.22577

Stirling, D. (2025, October 23). The “Great Divide”: Understanding US Political Polarization. Syracuse University Today. https://news.syr.edu/2025/10/23/the-great-divide-understanding-us-political-polarization/

‌

When enforcement overrides the fourth amendment

Cade Hamm

In a recently leaked ICE memo, published by the Associated Press, federal ICE officers are now asserting their own power to enter private residences without an official form of removal or judicial warrant. This use of administrative warrants in replacement of a proper judicial warrant violates constitutional principles and further expands already growing executive power (Associated Press, 2026).

An administrative warrant is a document issued by a federal agency, in this case ICE/DHS, giving the organization the authority to make an arrest. These are not signed by judges and are officiated by people like immigration officers (Motion Law, 2025). This same article also defines a judicial warrant and describes how judicial warrants typically serve as an authorization for the search and seizure of private property. A judicial warrant differs most significantly in that it is signed by a judge and has received external approval before being ordered (Motion Law, 2025).

ICE does not need a judicial warrant to make an arrest. However, this leaked memo does not speak of arrest; it describes the newfound right of entry into a private home. This has never been permitted and marks a significant expansion of ICE’s authority. Supreme Court decisions over the past century have all reinforced the authority of the judiciary in these proceedings and have concluded that allowing forced entry into a private home without the authorization of a judge or magistrate is unconstitutional and violates the Fourth Amendment (unreasonable search and seizure).

Payton v. New York: “The Fourth Amendment, made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits the police from making a warrantless and nonconsensual entry into a suspect's home in order to make a routine felony arrest” (445 U.S. 573, 1980).

Welsh v. Wisconsin: “The warrantless, nighttime entry of petitioner’s home to arrest him for a civil, nonjailable traffic offense, was prohibited by the special protection afforded the individual in his home by the Fourth Amendment” (466 U.S. 740, 1984).

Steagald v. United States: “A police officer may not conduct a warrantless search of a third party's home in an attempt to apprehend the subject of an arrest warrant, absent consent or exigent circumstances” (451 U.S. 204, 1981).

In a recent NPR article, the speakers address interpretations of this memo and responses by the current administration. According to the article, JD Vance’s response implies that “the Trump administration believes ICE administrative warrants satisfy the warrant requirements in the Constitution” (NPR, 2026, p. 1). This same article also discusses how the whistleblowers of this memo stated that this was being enforced in Texas, and new recruits are being trained on it (NPR, 2026).

Marisa Antos-Fallon, an author for the Fordham Urban Law Journal, details how this new practice is incredibly dangerous, as safeguards pertaining to the home have always been strong and have been enforced as such. This authority breaks longstanding legal practices and raises constitutional issues (Antos-Fallon, 2008). In another academic-leaning legal commentary, the author explains how the leaked memo contradicts settled Fourth Amendment principles as decided in the aforementioned cases (e.g., Payton v. New York) and that there is no recognized “civil enforcement exception” to the warrant requirement (Stay Tuned, 2026).

In sum, this controversy is not a technical legal issue, it is a reflection of the deeper trend of democratic erosion under the Trump administration. When executive organizations like ICE are permitted to reinterpret longstanding constitutional norms for their own benefit, it weakens safeguards for American democratic health. Unchecked power is dangerous, and understanding the legality of ICE operations is essential. Institutional change doesn’t happen overnight, democratic backsliding is a slow process, where norms like this are slowly challenged in operation until executive power is too great.

Bibliography

Antos-Fallon, M. (2008). The Fourth Amendment and immigration enforcement in the home: Can ICE target the utmost sphere of privacy? Fordham Urban Law Journal, 35(5), 1147–1186. https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol35/iss5/1/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Associated Press. (2026, January 25). AP exposes a major policy shift where federal immigration officers can forcibly enter homes without a judge’s warrant. https://www.ap.org/news-highlights/best-of-the-week/honorable-mention/2026/ap-exposes-a-major-policy-shift-where-federal-immigration-officers-can-forcibly-enter-homes-without-a-judges-warrant/

Motion Law. (2025). Understanding administrative vs. judicial warrants.

NPR. (2026, January 25). Internal DHS memo says ICE agents can enter homes without a judicial warrant. https://www.npr.org/2026/01/25/nx-s1-5685400/internal-dhs-memo-says-ice-agents-can-enter-homes-without-a-judicial-warrant

Stay Tuned. (2026). No, ICE cannot enter your home without a warrant. https://staytuned.substack.com/p/no-ice-cannot-enter-your-home-without?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Supreme Court Cases

Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/445/573/

Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740 (1984). https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/466/740

Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204 (1981). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steagald_v._United_States

Does MAGA meet the Fascist framework? A pillar by pillar breakdown

By: Cade Hamm

Introduction

Lawrence Britt, a 20th century political scientist and researcher, through comparative analysis, developed a framework for fascism, emphasizing reliance on authoritarian nationalism. In 21st century America, the MAGA movement, led by sitting President Donald J. Trump closely resembles a large portion of the fascist patterns described by Britt. The MAGA movement, defined by its Christian nationalist sentiment, anti-immigrant rhetoric, scientific opposition, and description of an ‘internal battle’, closely takes after the warnings of Britt’s findings and should draw concern amongst the American constituency. 

MAGA, or Make America Great Again, was first coined by Donald Trump during his 2015 Presidential campaign (Britannica, 2026). However, MAGA was not invented by Trump. The idea of restoring America to greatness was first popularized by Ronald Reagan, tying back to the conservative belief of modern decline. Reagan’s movement focused on economic factors, while Trump’s movement focuses on cultural purity and institutional distrust. Over time, MAGA has moved from a campaign slogan to a modern political movement, establishing media support groups, donors, and large scale right wing loyalty networks. The MAGA movement at its core is a “nativist political movement”, arguing that America has lost its dominance due to “immigration and multiculturalism” (Britannica, para. 1, 2026). Nativism is defined as the idea that native born citizens should be prioritized over foreign residents. MAGA merges nativist policy with right-wing populism, ethnonationalism, and authoritarian leadership (Thulin, 2025). The majority of this nativist rhetoric is aimed at developing countries, promoting tighter Mexican border policing, and anti-Islamic border policy. In Trump’s own words, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists” (ABC News, 2016). This pattern has continued into Trump’s current presidency, as in 2025 the ICE Force received a drastic funding increase’ receiving “45 billion” (American Immigration Council, n.d., para.1), and Trump has reportedly proclaimed the cultural inferiority of Somali immigrants, referring to them as “garbage” (AP News, 2025). MAGA also argues that the American decline can be attributed to globalization, and international alliances like NATO, and the UN, consistently vocalizing contention with American presence in European affairs (Council of Foreign Relations, 2023). 

To analyze the fascist tendencies of modern political regimes, scholars often utilize 20th century frameworks of patterns and trends. One commonly cited framework is that of Lawrence Britt (2004). Britt, through comparative analysis, looked at Nazi Germany, Mussolini’s Italy, Francoist Spain, and Imperial Japan, to identify common themes. Britt’s findings are not an academically qualified checklist, but a warning guide for authoritarianism. These tendencies were broken down into 14 key characteristics; Powerful and continuing nationalism, Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights, Identification of enemies/Scapegoats as a unifying cause, Supremacy of the Military, Rampant Sexism, Controlled Mass Media, Obsession with National Security, Religion and Government are Intertwined, Corporate Power is protected, Labor Power is suppressed, Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts, Obsession with Crime and Punishment, Rampant Cronyism and Corruption, and Fraudulent Elections (Britt, 2004). 

Pillars of Facism 

Powerful and Continuing Fascism

Another element of this nationalist sentiment is the insistence on restoration and internal conflict. The MAGA movement is based on the fundamental belief that modernity has brought about the decline of America. This idea of loss is rooted in nationalism, as it creates a sense of moral urgency to revive a greater, purer past nation.

Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights

In Britt’s description of human rights ignorance, he explains that under many fascist regimes, leaders dismiss human rights or civil liberties because of some perceived “need.” This often leads citizens to overlook government violence and oppression.

In 2025, ICE experienced its deadliest year in over two decades. Under the Trump administration, deportations were significantly expanded, and by December 2025 nearly 70,000 people were held in detention, with approximately 75 percent having no criminal conviction (The Guardian, 2026). According to Setareh Ghandehari of the Detention Watch Network, detention conditions have deteriorated substantially under the current administration, contributing to the heightened number of deaths (The Guardian, 2026).

Identification of Enemies and Scapegoating as a Unifying Cause

The Human Rights Campaign, the largest LGBTQ+ advocacy organization in the United States, reported in December 2025 that the MAGA movement’s fixation on transgender people has become central to its agenda. This focus has driven medically restrictive policies and justified major funding cuts in the FY26 budget (Human Rights Campaign, 2025). Mark Bromley, co-chair of the Council for Global Equality, further stated that House Republicans “chose to stoke the flames of hate” by scapegoating global LGBTQI+ programs during these budget reductions (Human Rights Campaign, 2025). This pattern of scapegoating extends beyond LGBTQ+ communities.

Eric Lach (2024) describes how Trump’s MAGA rhetoric relies heavily on the scapegoating of immigrants. Immigrants are consistently blamed for societal problems, treated as a homogeneous group, and portrayed as dangerous outsiders. Trump has referred to undocumented immigrants as “criminals,” “snakes,” and individuals “coming from jails,” and has repeatedly claimed they steal public benefits, while advocating for a border wall more than 600 times (Marshall Project, 2024).

Supremacy of the Military

On January 8, 2026, Donald Trump proposed requesting a defense budget of approximately $1.5 trillion. Experts widely disputed this figure, which would represent a 66 percent increase from the previous year’s defense budget (Kahn, 2026).

Trump has also deployed federal troops domestically and expanded foreign military operations. Beginning in 2025, troops were deployed in Los Angeles, Washington, DC, Memphis, Chicago, Portland, and New Orleans to combat what Trump described as an “invasion” and a “war within.” Additionally, recent military actions and threats involving Venezuela, Iran, and Greenland demonstrate Trump’s willingness to use military force to reinforce his political movement and emphasize national defense.

Rampant Sexism

Throughout his campaigns against female political opponents, Trump has frequently relied on sexist rhetoric to delegitimize his adversaries. He referred to Nancy Pelosi as “evil, sick, crazy,” allowing his audience to complete the insult. During attacks on Kamala Harris, speakers at MAGA rallies insinuated she was a prostitute and made jokes about her “working on the corner” (Lu, 2024).

Following Trump’s victory in the 2024 election cycle, researchers documented a dramatic increase in misogynistic language online, noting a 4,600 percent surge in phrases such as “your body, my choice” and “get back in the kitchen” (PBS NewsHour, 2024).

Former MAGA activist Charlie Kirk echoed similar rhetoric, telling Taylor Swift to “submit to your husband” and asserting that women are “not in charge,” reinforcing rigid gender hierarchies (Yahoo Entertainment, 2024). As Britt notes, fascist regimes tend to enforce strict gender roles, and the MAGA movement has consistently attacked feminism while promoting female submission and withdrawal from public life.

Controlled Mass Media

A 2025 survey conducted by Megan Brenan found that only 8 percent of Republicans believed the media reported accurately. Overall trust in the media has reached a historic low, with just 28 percent of Americans expressing confidence in news outlets (Brenan, 2025). This decline coincides with sustained attacks on the press by Trump, who has openly stated that when negative stories are written about him, “no one will believe you.”

Reports indicate that Trump has pressured media organizations by threatening broadcast licenses, interfering with business operations, and banning outlets from official events (Poynter Institute, 2026). Additionally, publicly funded media organizations such as PBS and NPR experienced a combined $1.1 billion reduction in funding following criticism of the administration (Brenan, 2025).

Obsession with National Security

An obsession with national security, as defined by Britt, often involves the use of fear of foreign threats as a means of public manipulation. In 2017, Trump tweeted that “our national security is at stake,” framing immigrants as existential dangers. This rhetoric has continued into 2026, with travel bans imposed on visa applicants from 75 countries, 38 of which face partial or full restrictions following a January 14 expansion announcement (Council on Foreign Relations, 2026).

The same analysis notes that over 600,000 deportations have already occurred during Trump’s presidency, drawing condemnation from human rights organizations and the United Nations refugee agency (Council on Foreign Relations, 2026). A January 20, 2026 executive order explicitly states that U.S. policy aims to protect citizens from “aliens who intend to commit terrorist attacks,” while restricting visa access on the grounds of administrative efficiency.

However, data from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (2024) indicates no resurgence of jihadist terrorism in the United States, with only one major attack occurring since 2001. In contrast, far-right terrorism has killed more Americans in the post-9/11 era than jihadist violence (New America, 2023).

Religion and Government Are Intertwined

Reporting has documented the rise of “MAGA Christianity,” a phenomenon in which religious identity and political loyalty become deeply intertwined. Journalists and researchers describe MAGA rallies that incorporate prayer, pastors, biblical language, and claims that Trump is divinely chosen, blending religious devotion with political mobilization (Smith, 2024).

Corporate Power is Protected and Labor Power is Suppressed

Over the span of Trump’s presidency he has consistently given tax cuts to corporate entities and has accepted significant portions of his personal funding from corporate PACs. In his first term, his 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs act reduced the corporate tax rate by a staggering 14%. Then, in his second term, it worsened. He repealed over 100 feral regulations, making compliance costs for corporations cheaper, and deregulating a large sector of their economic activity. A 2025 analysis of Trump’s economic policy also concluded that labor regulations were significantly weakened, shifting power away from employees (Curry, 2025). On top of all of this, a study done by the Institute on Taxation and economic policy (2024) similarly found that many corporations were paying significantly low tax rates, with 16% paying effective rates of a mere “less than 5%” (para. 1). 

Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts 

The Trump administration’s Big Beautiful Bill has been responsible for some of the largest budget cuts if not the largest budget cuts in modern American history. So far this year, he has proposed an $18 billion cut to the National Institute of Health, $5 billion from the NSF, proposed Pell Grant Cuts, Federal Work-Study Program cuts, and has targeted universities like Harvard, Duke, and Vanderbilt for federal aid cuts. 

These propositions and policies don’t just end at cuts. The Trump administration has also previously presented budget plans threatening to condense the NIH from 27 departments into 8, and completely eliminating the “the National Institutes for Nursing Research, the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, the Fogarty International Center, and the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities” (Palmer, 2025, para. 9). 

He has also verbatim said the following: 

 “I like bullets or … as little as possible. I don't need, you know, 200-page reports on something that can be handled on a page.”,  “I’ve always wanted to say this—I’ve never said this before with all the talking we all do, all of these experts … ‘the experts are terrible!’”, and  “I love the poorly educated,”

Fraudulent Elections 

After the 2020 election, Trump preached on any platform available that the election was stolen and he was the true victor. Despite no conclusive evidence ever being presented supporting this, his rhetoric that the election was a cheat created widespread mistrust in the electoral credibility. Then, on January 6th, 2021, a violent mob of rioters stormed the American capitol. This riot, fueled by President Trump, resulted in numerous deaths, damage to the premises, and one of the most significant challenges to American democracy in modern history. 

Not only this, but despite his accusations of election fraud, Trump has been exposed for pressuring his colleagues into shifting the results of elections in his favor. On one occasion, in a phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, Trump asked him to “find 11,780 votes” to sway the results. 

Conclusion

This is not a partisan issue. Patterns need to be recognized so we can safeguard the future of our country. America is not a fascist state, but the MAGA movement shows trends that commonly challenge democratic norms, highlighting the need for careful attention to how political power is exercised.

Bibliography

ABC News. (2016, June 16). Donald Trump: ‘When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best’. ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-mexico-vice-versa/story?id=41767704

American Immigration Council. (n.d.). ICE expanding detention system. Retrieved January 29, 2026, from https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/blog/ice-expanding-detention-system

AP News. (2025, July 10). Trump calls Somali immigrants “garbage” during rally in Minnesota. Retrieved January 29, 2026, from https://apnews.com/article/trump-garbage-somalia-minneapolis-immigrant-omar-03e31bba53519d8a39b419679a3b75d9

Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopaedia. (2026, January 16). MAGA movement. Encyclopaedia Britannica. Retrieved January 29, 2026, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/MAGA-movement

Brenan, M. (2025). Americans’ trust in the media reaches historic lows. Gallup. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com

Britt, L. (2004, November 2). Fourteen characteristics of fascism. Educate-Yourself. https://educate-yourself.org/cn/fourteencharacteristicsfascism02nov04.shtml

Curry, J. (2025). Trump’s economic policies and labor power: An analysis. Economic Policy Review, 37(2), 45–68.

Council on Foreign Relations. (2023, June 14). Trump’s criticism of the UN and global alliances. Retrieved January 29, 2026, from https://www.cfr.org/articles/trumps-criticism-un

Council on Foreign Relations. (2026). Visa restrictions and deportations under Trump, January 2026 update. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org

Ghandehari, S. (2026, January 15). Detention conditions under the Trump administration. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com

Human Rights Campaign. (2025). Impact of MAGA policies on LGBTQ+ communities. Retrieved from https://www.hrc.org

Kahn, J. (2026, January 8). Trump proposes $1.5 trillion defense budget. Defense News. Retrieved from https://www.defensenews.com

Kellman, P. (2025). Trump’s statements on Somali immigrants. Journal of Contemporary Politics, 19(3), 112–125.

Lu, D. (2024). Sexism in MAGA political campaigns. Gender & Politics Review, 12(1), 22–40.

Marshall Project. (2024). Trump’s rhetoric on immigrants: A timeline. Retrieved from https://www.themarshallproject.org

New America. (2023). Domestic terrorism trends in the U.S. Retrieved from https://www.newamerica.org

Palmer, R. (2025, October 10). Trump administration budget cuts to NIH and NSF. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com

PBS NewsHour. (2024). Rise of misogynistic online language after 2024 election. Retrieved from https://www.pbs.org/newshour

Poynter Institute. (2026). Trump and media interference: An analysis. Retrieved from https://www.poynter.org

Smith, A. (2024). MAGA Christianity: Politics and religion intertwined. Journal of Religion and Politics, 30(4), 56–71.

Thulin, K: VC Research, University of California, Berkeley. (2025, October 12). There’s a term for Trump’s political style: Authoritarian populism. Retrieved January 29, 2026, from https://vcresearch.berkeley.edu/news/theres-term-trumps-political-style-authoritarian-populism

Yahoo Entertainment. (2024). Charlie Kirk and gendered rhetoric in the MAGA movement. Retrieved from https://www.yahoo.com

The Guardian. (2026, January 15). ICE detention reaches deadliest year under Trump. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com