With the US midterm elections approaching on 3 November, the balance of power in Congress could shift. Yet many of the legal and institutional tools used for political repression were established long before Trump’s return to office, through 25 years of bipartisan counterterrorism policies.
Less than a year into his second term, the Trump Administration issued National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7), a directive to federal law enforcement to target people they believed were motivated by antifascism. The memo articulates this ideology as “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States Government; extremism on migration, race, and gender; and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality.” In short, the administration was openly announcing their intention to persecute and prosecute people for a wide range of political beliefs.
The Architecture of Authoritarian Repression
NSPM-7 is just one in a series of executive orders and Presidential decrees that have directed the Justice Department, the FBI, Homeland Security, the IRS, and other agencies to use their might against the administration’s perceived political opponents. Under the banner of counterterrorism, the administration has initiated baseless investigations into nonprofits and foundations, aggressively prosecuted activists, ramped up their campaign of targeted detention and deportation against protesting Israel’s genocide in Gaza, and continued their campaign of bombing civilian boats off the coast of Latin America.
Their “counterterrorism” efforts are a key component of a broader effort to consolidate power and undermine democratic institutions. After being sworn into office, the Trump administration rapidly consolidated power in the Executive Branch. They dismantled independent oversight mechanisms, appointed unqualified Trump loyalists into high government offices, and seized power through executive orders. They’ve used this power to undermine educational institutions, law firms, the press, and civil society organisations. Taken together, these are the actions of overt authoritarianism.
Like most authoritarian projects, this one is animated by hostility and repression against people perceived as different from those in power. The Trump Administration has dismantled civil rights protections, excised all mention of “diversity” from government agencies, engaged in vitriolic attacks on the rights of queer and trans people, and enacted brutal violence against migrants. Habeas Corpus rights have been ignored as ICE agents have flooded cities, and national guard troops have deployed domestically. Migrants and those working to protect them have been killed during mass round ups and in inhumane detention centres.
These policies, and the revanchist ethos undergirding them, are tremendously unpopular. Many are looking to the midterm elections as an opportunity to change course and change may be coming. Democrats hope they will take back control of the House of Representatives. Most political observers believe that they will, and while earlier this year it seemed unlikely that Democrats would also retake control of the Senate, it now also looks like control of the Senate is within reach. But voting alone won’t get us off an authoritarian path. While the threats posed by the Trump administration are unique, they have been made possible by twenty-five years of bipartisan actions after 9/11 that undermined both civil and political rights protections.
The Legacy of the War on Terror
NSPM-7 and subsequent Justice Department implementation directives strengthen infrastructure used against Muslim and Arab communities, as well as racial justice activists, over the last 25 years. Implementation of NSPM-7 is being overseen by Joint Terrorism Task Forces first established by the Patriot Act. These are bodies that have been responsible for entrapment operations, domestic spying, infiltration of activist groups, and other abuses.
For a quarter century, the global war on terror has been used as justification for putting in place laws and policies that systematically degraded civil and human rights. In the aftermath of 9/11, the government set up a Muslim registry, built new deportation mechanisms, targeted charities and other civil society organisations, surveilled Mosques and community groups, entrapped people in government-concocted terrorism schemes, stripped people of citizenship and deported them, and assassinated people, including U.S. citizens, globally.
In 2001 the USA PATRIOT Act vastly expanded government authority to spy on its own citizens, allowing federal agencies to surveil an individual’s internet searches, medical histories, bookstore purchases, financial records, location records, and social media. The PATRIOT Act was passed by a huge bipartisan majority – in the Senate only one person voted against it.
In 2002, the Bush Administration instituted the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS), a special registration system for Muslim, Arab, and South Asian men and boys. During the time that NSEERS was in place, approximately 90,000 people were registered, and thousands were interrogated and detained. Over 13,000 people were deported from the U.S. as communities were raided, students were denied access to schools, and families were torn apart. After significant public pressure, NSEERS was officially terminated in the final days of the Obama administration in 2016. But it put in place many of the legal and structural frameworks that are being used now against immigrant communities.
Similarly, recent attacks on civil society organisations and the executive order declaring “Antifa” a domestic terrorism organisation resemble earlier attacks on Muslim charities and communities. In the wake of 9/11, the government opened investigations into many Muslim charities including Kinder USA, the Islamic Society of North America, and the Holy Land Foundation. Subpoenas, audits, and public attacks were used to intimidate and shut down groups. In 2010, the Obama administration successfully argued to defend an extremely broad definition of “material support for terrorism,” criminalising a wide array of peacebuilding and humanitarian activities if participants were part of designated groups.
There is a direct line between these cases and the Trump administration’s attacks on immigrant rights organisations and left leaning philanthropies. The False Claims Act, which is being used to target Harvard, has been used for more than a decade to harass and try to shut down groups supporting Palestinian rights. The politicised use of terrorism charges against immigration rights activists in Prairieland, Texas builds from the precedent set in the Holy Land Foundation and Fort Dix Five Cases.
The Patriot Act, weakened FISA regulations, Joint Terrorism Task Forces and Fusion Centers, 1033 programs, the conflation of immigration enforcement and counterterrorism, and surveillance of communities – these are not inventions of the Trump administration. These tools were already at Trump’s disposal because decades of bipartisan actions eroded safeguards and constitutional protections. Moving back from authoritarianism will require reversing 25 years of actions that have systematically undermined our rights.
For decades, Muslim and Arab organisations, racial and environmental justice activists, and civil and human rights groups have pointed out the dangers posed by War on Terror frameworks. However, because the domestic impacts of the War on Terror targeted Muslims, Arabs, and other communities of colour using racist national security narratives, there has been little mainstream support or change.
The actions of the Trump administration may have changed the political calculus. The impacts of these policies have spread beyond marginalised communities and into the mainstream. When a soccer mom or a nurse is labelled a “terrorist” after being killed by the government, the label starts to lose its power. When law enforcement is weaponised against whole cities, people’s eyes are opened to the threats of government repression. When mainstream universities and philanthropies are targeted by the government, more people can see through the rhetoric.
Beyond the Ballot Box: The Need for Structural Change
A movement within faith communities, a broad spectrum of the political left, and even parts of the moderate right has started to rise up against the threat of authoritarianism. Links are building between that new movement and those who have been pushing against the global war on terror framework for decades. No matter what happens in the midterms, continued mass mobilisation will be needed until there are major structural changes.
Even some political actors recognise that structural changes are needed to step back from the authoritarian threat. The “Reimagining Security Act” recently released by Rep. Delia Ramirez is a step in the right direction. If passed, it would completely dismantle the Department of Homeland Security, while establishing a Department of Community Safety. It would strengthen civil rights protections, limit the ability of the Executive Branch to label groups domestic terrorists, end mass detention and deportation campaigns, and more while investing in human needs and real community safety.
Reversing course won’t be easy, and elections on their own are unlikely to dramatically change current realities. But if we keep strengthening our coalitions and keep up the pressure no matter who is in office, we can counteract authoritarianism and undo the damage caused by two decades of bi-partisan counterterror policies that undermined everyone’s rights. If activists continue to protest and work for change in ways that acknowledge and challenge the bipartisan roots of this crisis, then a different future is possible.
Cover image: A “Vote Here” sign in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Photo: Lorie Shaull / Wikimedia Commons CC BY-SA 2.0.