America is entering one of the most consequential chapters in its modern history. Protests are occurring across the country, not as a reaction to a single policy, but to a growing fear that the foundations of democratic governance itself are being brazenly dismantled.
This moment did not arrive suddenly. Long before the election of the nation’s 47th president, Americans were deeply divided – by economic anxiety, higher taxes and dwindling benefits, and a widening sense that government no longer served ordinary people. Families struggle under inflation, rising housing costs, unaffordable health care and escalating insurance premiums. Immigration policy remained unresolved. Cultural debates about race, gender, sexuality and identity hardened into political battle lines.
That unrest created fertile ground for a radical experiment in governance. In the background, conservative organizations spent years, beginning in the Reagan era, crafting a plan to fundamentally restructure the federal government. The 2025 Presidential Transition Project, or more commonly known as Project 2025, led by the Heritage Foundation and nearly 100 allied groups, was designed to dismantle the administrative state and centralize power within the presidency.
During the 2024 campaign, Trump publicly denied involvement, dismissing the plan as a political scare tactic. Yet he simultaneously praised portions of it. That ambiguity has now vanished. The blueprint is no longer theoretical. It is being implemented.
Project 2025 called for replacing nonpartisan civil servants with political loyalists, dismantling agencies such as the Department of Education and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, eliminating diversity initiatives across government and the military, expanding immigration enforcement, restricting reproductive rights and pushing Medicare and Medicaid toward privatization. It also proposed weakening the Affordable Care Act, cutting National Institutes of Health funding, restructuring the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and reversing Medicare’s authority to negotiate prescription drug prices.
Since January 2025, architects and advocates of this agenda have assumed key positions of power. Russell Vought now leads the Office of Management and Budget. Stephen Miller serves as deputy chief of staff. Tom Homan directs immigration enforcement. Brendan Carr is chair of the Federal Communications Commission. Analysts estimate that roughly 40% of Project 2025’s directives have already been enacted, largely through executive orders – more than 230 in 12 months.
Those orders have moved with stunning speed: sweeping border crackdowns and raids by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement across the U.S., attempts to end birthright citizenship, withdrawal from international agreements including the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Agreement, and imposition of broad global tariffs. Others have targeted law firms, imposed steep H-1B visa fees, labeled antifa a terrorist organization and designated fentanyl a weapon of mass destruction. More than 160 lawsuits are now challenging these actions.
The public response has been swift. Demonstrations have erupted nationwide, fueled particularly by alarm about immigration enforcement. ICE has expanded rapidly, incorporating tens of thousands of new personnel. Civil rights organizations report raids ensnaring legal residents and U.S. citizens, without warrants or meaningful due process. Cases of wrongful deaths, detention and deportation have alarmed legal scholars, tribal leaders, current and former federal officials, and the public.
America’s standing abroad has also weakened. Long-standing alliances have frayed under erratic diplomacy and aggressive tariff policies. International criticism has intensified over U.S. positions on Gaza, reduced support for Ukraine and hostile rhetoric toward allied nations. Market volatility following tariff announcements has further unsettled an already anxious economy. The elimination of the U.S. Agency for International Development and broken ties with the WHO have cost countless lives.
All of this is unfolding as millions of Americans remain unable to afford housing, medical care or basic necessities. Against that reality, reports showing the president has accumulated significant personal wealth in under 12 months ($1.4 billion) – through real estate ventures, international business dealings, cryptocurrency interests and enterprises involving close family members – have deepened public distrust.
Yet, the most enduring damage may be institutional. Core democratic principles – equality before the law, judicial independence, transparency, accountability, and civil liberties – are increasingly perceived as negotiable. Trump’s criminal convictions, mass pardons of individuals involved in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, and Supreme Court rulings expanding presidential immunity have fueled a dangerous belief: that the presidency may no longer be meaningfully constrained.
This is not someone else’s government. It belongs to the people – and history will judge whether we chose to defend it. The Constitution is not self-enforcing. Institutions do not survive on tradition alone. Democracies fail when citizens assume someone else will step in. There is still time, but not for indifference. The choice before the country is no longer abstract. It is participation or surrender. Silence or responsibility. The future of the republic will not be decided behind closed doors – it will be decided by those who show up.
Concetta C. DiRusso, Ph.D., and Paul N. Black, Ph.D., are retired biochemistry professors, Fellows of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and members of the Professional Associates at Fort Lewis College. They live in Durango.
