Areas of Constitutional Concern
The report details several executive actions from early 2025 that challenge foundational constitutional principles.
Denial of Due Process
Invocation of archaic statutes to bypass fundamental rights.
Executive Action: Proclamation 10903
The administration invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to authorize summary removal of alleged gang members without due process, an action lower courts found to exceed statutory authority.
Then: A Founding Grievance
"For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offenses." - Declaration of Independence
Now: A Modern Echo
"Is this not a return to that very grievance, masked by the cloak of executive prerogative...?" - Federalist No. 86
Weaponization of Government
Targeting citizens, associations, and public servants for political reasons.
Executive Orders & Investigations
EOs were issued to strip security clearances from law firms (e.g., Perkins Coie) representing political opponents, investigate DEI initiatives in academia and commerce, and enable mass terminations in the civil service. These actions were challenged as violating First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment rights.
"This assault on the free association of citizens and the imposition of a singular, undefined ideology by executive fiat, contravenes the essence of a free society..." - Federalist No. 86
Assault on Democratic Norms
Challenging established constitutional amendments and limits.
Questioning Term Limits
Public suggestions of pursuing a third presidential term, in direct defiance of the 22nd Amendment, ratified to prevent the "perpetuation in office" and guard against totalitarianism.
"The very idea of a fixed term... is openly mocked by suggestions of a third term, flying in the face of constitutional amendment wrought by prudent experience." - Federalist No. 86
Erosion of Judicial Power
A pattern of defiance and procedural avoidance undermining the judiciary.
A Two-Tiered Response
Lower courts actively issue injunctions, with some judges finding "probable cause to hold the government in criminal contempt." However, the Supreme Court has often used "highly technical and narrow procedural decisions to avoid directly confronting" the administration, providing a "longer runway" for executive overreach.
"The federal judiciary... must stand as the ultimate arbiter, lest the innovations of the executive become irreversible changes to our constitutional order." - Federalist No. 86