I want to consider some cautiously good news today. The good news is that certain cultural, political, international, and legal guardrails are holding against Donald Trump and his government right now.
Democratic resilience is appearing from three directions at once: institutional resistance, civic mobilization, and international democratic solidarity.
This Substack is reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
I am not suggesting that our democracy is in the clear. Not at all. This administration has posed and continues to pose a substantial challenge to democratic norms and institutions.
I am suggesting that we see signs of power checking power, of institutions doing their job, of people rising to the challenge. Naming some examples of this should embolden all of us to do our part.
These are not in any particular order, just presented as they come to mind.
The courts have imposed meaningful limits on Trump’s effort to govern trade policy by unilateral executive decree, and have blocked a number of other Administration decrees and policies. For example, the Supreme Court struck down major tariff actions earlier this year, and federal trade courts have since ruled against parts of the administration’s replacement tariff regime as well. Appeals continue, but the judiciary has clearly signaled that even presidents do not possess unlimited authority over taxation and trade policy.
Several highly publicized efforts to investigate or prosecute prominent Trump critics and perceived enemies have run into serious legal obstacles, judicial pushback, failed grand jury efforts, or internal resistance from career prosecutors. These episodes suggest that parts of the legal system are still resisting overt politicization, and that longstanding legal norms still carry some weight.
The Federal Reserve has retained its independence. Jerome Powell refused to resign and largely ignored the president’s threats and provocations, even the threat of prosecution. Lisa Cook refused to resign and was retained in her position. It remains to be seen how new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh will operate, though he has pledged independence.
The SAVE Act — which would federalize parts of voter registration policy and impose strict proof-of-citizenship requirements that could disenfranchise many eligible voters — has not cleared Congress despite intense pressure from Trump and his allies. That legislative failure matters.
Federalism itself remains a democratic guardrail. States (some of them, anyway) continue to exercise substantial independent authority over elections, education, reproductive policy, law enforcement, and civil liberties, often functioning as counterweights to federal overreach.
The Democratic Party has continued to function as an opposition party, and has not been cowed into submission. If it gains power after the November elections, it will exercise the kind of democratic oversight and power-checking that the Republican Party has largely failed to offer.
Allied nations with democratic norms have done their part to resist the Administration.
Canada strongly resisted Trump’s provocations regarding sovereignty and trade pressure. Greenland and Denmark likewise refused to yield to territorial rhetoric and instead reinforced their own diplomatic and security posture. Trump’s expansionist rhetoric appears to have receded for now.
Ukraine has proven far more resilient than many expected. European support has expanded as U.S. reliability has weakened, and Ukraine has maintained an effective defense posture rather than capitulating to pressure for an unfavorable settlement.
The Hungarian people voted out Viktor Orban, overwhelmingly, despite a visit from the US Vice-President.
Trump’s dismissal of his European allies and wishy-washy posture to NATO has led Europeans toward greater solidarity and cooperation with each other and steps toward an enhanced military posture for their own defense.
Despite its overall supine posture under GOP rule, Congressional scrutiny and their own failures have doomed some of Trump’s least-able appointees and forced their removal.
Public backlash, litigation, media scrutiny, and operational failures have forced at least some moderation and recalibration in immigration enforcement tactics, even if many harmful past actions and very troubling current practices have had their effects.
Congressional scrutiny, scientific institutions, state governments, and public criticism have all limited the extent to which Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been able to translate anti-vaccine views into sweeping federal policy.
Public opposition to military escalation with Iran has been substantial, including among segments of Trump’s own political coalition. Economic pressures, geopolitical constraints, and the risks of escalation all seem to be limiting the administration’s room for maneuver.
Civil society organizations that defend civil rights, voting rights, and democracy are heavily mobilized. Every democracy-eroding step taken by the administration faces litigation.
The media landscape has been affected by some right-wing takeovers and various pressures from the government, but the independent media sector survives. The New York Times, for example, reports the news and offers opinion and commentary without apparent fear, despite a frivolous Trump lawsuit. The same is true with many other individual personalities and news outlets.
Meanwhile, the vast opining that ordinary Americans do on social media continues unabated – after some initial chilling effect.
The universities have absorbed significant damage under federal pressure, especially around DEI programs and research funding. Some institutions capitulated too quickly; others have resisted more forcefully. Some faculty members have faced pressure to change their curriculum or have been fired. Yet, overall, the university sector still retains substantial institutional autonomy, particularly outside the deepest red states.
Trump’s declining approval ratings indicate that the American public is not happy with the performance of the president or administration, and one sees adjustments being quietly made to try to respond to public opinion – on immigration enforcement, the Iran war, and other arenas. If public opinion still matters, that is a sign of democratic health.
Despite immense pressure and conspiracy rhetoric, election administration systems in the United States have continued to function. Local election officials, judges, and state administrators have repeatedly resisted efforts to overturn certified outcomes or manipulate voting procedures. Let no one underestimate the pressure being put on our electoral system, however, including the rapid gerrymandering that threatens to wipe out Black political representation in many areas.
Large portions of the federal civil service, military leadership, inspector general system, and career legal bureaucracy continue to operate according to professional rather than personalist norms, despite intense political pressure.
Americans have not retreated into silence. Protest movements, local organizing, journalism, litigation networks, religious activism, and public advocacy remain vigorous and visible, despite ominous threats from Washington.
A review of this list teaches us what democratic guardrails actually are:
- courts
- federalism
- elections
- civil society
- public opinion
- universities
- journalism
- markets/economic constraints
- allied democracies
- professional bureaucracies
Democracies do not preserve themselves automatically. They survive because citizens, institutions, and communities summon the courage to defend them. The signs of democratic resilience visible today should not make us complacent. They should make us more determined. As we get closer to November 2026, and 2028, let us exercise democratic responsibility in every way we know how.
Note: An earlier version of this article first appeared in Baptist News Global.
