How a Future Democrat Could Use Trump-Era Powers to Repair Democracy

How the Next Democratic President Could Use Trump-Era Powers to Rebuild Democracy

Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

Key Takeaways

• The article argues that the next Democratic president must embrace the same expansive executive powers that Trump used, rather than voluntarily limiting the office.
• Day 1 priorities would include defunding and restructuring immigration enforcement agencies like ICE and CBP, and creating a Truth and Reconciliation-style process for victims.
• Supreme Court precedents have effectively allowed presidents to impound funds, dismantle agencies, and fire civil servants—tools the article says should be used to undo Trump’s legacy.
• Norms cannot be restored unilaterally; the piece contends that Democrats must “give Republicans a taste of their own medicine” so both sides once again see value in shared democratic rules.
• The ultimate goal is not norms for their own sake, but a functioning democratic state that emerges from using newly expanded powers to repair damage and protect vulnerable communities.

Table of Contents

• Why Recovery Matters After Trump-Era Governance
• A Maximalist Executive Power Strategy
• Day One Agenda: Immigration Enforcement and Repair
• Using Trump’s Supreme Court Precedents Against His Legacy
• Rebuilding Norms by Ending Unilateral Restraint
• What Concerned Citizens Can Do Next

Why Recovery Matters After Trump-Era Governance

The Slate conversation between Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern centers on a deeply practical question: what does democratic recovery actually look like if a Democrat wins the presidency and Congress in 2028, but the Supreme Court remains aligned with Trump-era legal thinking?

Instead of offering abstract hopes, the article lays out a concrete, aggressive blueprint for how a future Democratic president (nicknamed “President AOC” as a stand-in) could respond to a court that, in their view, has repeatedly ignored precedent, norms, and key constitutional protections.

A Maximalist Executive Power Strategy

The core argument is stark: Do not bring a shrimp fork to a knife fight. Trump and the current Supreme Court, the authors argue, have massively expanded presidential power. The article insists the next Democratic president must:

• Refuse to unilaterally surrender these powers.
• Use them “aggressively for good” to repair institutional damage.
• Accept that norms alone will not constrain a party that sees only upside in breaking them.

This “maximalist” approach is framed not as a power grab, but as a defensive move to salvage democracy by operating within the very precedents Trump created.

Day One Agenda: Immigration Enforcement and Repair

Much of the proposed Day 1 agenda focuses on immigration enforcement, where the authors see immense harm under Trump:

• Impound ICE’s budget—refuse to spend billions appropriated to the agency.
• Mass firings of immigration and border agents accused of violence or discrimination.
• Close immigrant detention centers and free detainees where legally possible.
• Fire key leaders such as the CBP chief and any agent involved in abuses in cities like Chicago, D.C., and Los Angeles.

Then comes a more transformative step: rerouting the money that would have funded enforcement into a reparations program for victims. This would include:

• Creating a new agency by executive order.
• Returning wrongly deported noncitizens.
• Turning ICE and CBP headquarters into a Truth and Reconciliation Agency focused on documenting harm and compensating victims.

For readers following immigration policy or transitional justice, these ideas echo global truth commission models, adapted to U.S. constitutional realities as reshaped by Trump-era decisions.

Using Trump’s Supreme Court Precedents Against His Legacy

The article highlights specific powers the Supreme Court has, in practice, allowed Trump to use:

• Impounding funds Congress has already appropriated.
• Unilaterally closing or hollowing out agencies like USAID or the Education Department.
• Firing tens of thousands of civil servants and reshaping the bureaucracy.
• Paying reparations to Jan. 6 defendants and even, potentially, to himself.

Under these precedents, the next Democratic president could, the authors argue, just as lawfully:

• Purge Trump loyalists from agencies across the executive branch, including the FTC and NLRB.
• Strip Trump’s name from federal institutions like the Kennedy Center or Institute of Peace if it was granted unlawfully.
• Launch sweeping administrative changes and accountability efforts while litigation drags on.

They fully expect legal challenges. But their strategy is explicit: even if courts eventually rein things in, use the years-long litigation window to repair as much damage as possible.

Rebuilding Norms by Ending Unilateral Restraint

A major theme is the failure of unilateral norm adherence. According to Lithwick and Stern, the Biden administration illustrates that simply following traditional norms—like maintaining distance between the White House and the Department of Justice—does not convince the other side to reciprocate.

“You cannot restore the norms magically by having one side abide by them.”

In their view, norms only survive when both parties feel they gain from them and fear their loss. As long as Democrats alone restrain themselves, Republicans are incentivized to keep breaking norms for partisan advantage.

Therefore, they argue, the only path back to a shared framework is to demonstrate the costs of norm-shattering when the other party holds power. The objective is not revenge for its own sake, but to restore a stable equilibrium where everyone wants some guardrails.

Crucially, they insist that norms are a means, not an end. The destination is a functioning democratic state, even if the road there requires using powers progressives once opposed.

What Concerned Citizens Can Do Next

If you care about democratic recovery, this framework suggests several practical steps:

• Stay informed about Supreme Court decisions expanding executive power and how they might be used by future administrations.
• Press candidates to explain how they would use, not just renounce, Trump-era powers to protect vulnerable communities.
• Explore comparative models of truth and reconciliation, reparations, and institutional reform to imagine realistic U.S. versions.
• Engage with long-form legal journalism and podcasts that track these developments over time.

For deeper context, consider exploring additional coverage on topics like executive power, Supreme Court jurisprudence, immigration enforcement, and democratic backsliding from reputable news and legal analysis outlets.

Source: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/12/trump-democracy-supreme-court-2028-democrats.html?via=rss