We’ve already discussed anxiety over censorship and preemptive compliance in the United States. Now, let’s take a moment to explore which other core American rights might be in jeopardy. 

Many critics of the current government have shared concerns over potential censorship in the United States. While free speech is one of the most championed freedoms, it is certainly not the only constitutional right under threat. This time, we’ll take a few minutes to examine what other American rights are being jeopardized by the Trump administration. 

In an in-depth analysis, I determined that although the United States government hasn’t fully met the criteria for a fascist regime, it is gravitating towards an authoritarian playbook. That means the entire framework of constitutional protection—including legal, institutional, and cultural norms—is now destabilized. 

From suppressing dissent to weaponizing the state against individuals based on identity, political affiliation, or perceived disloyalty, the American people are experiencing a dangerous escalation away from guaranteed rights. Here’s a dive into the most pressing American rights that are under threat.

Which American rights are most threatened?

Authoritarian societies eventually affect all people regardless of color or status, as they elevate the nation over the individual. However, the most immediate losses of American rights are felt by the most vulnerable. This chips away at the 14th Amendment’s guarantees of equal protection and due process by creating unequal enforcement of the law and eroding judicial impartiality. Here’s exactly where some of these losses are being felt.

Discrimination & immigration actions

ICE has received significant media criticism, with agents accused of targeting and harassing not only undocumented people but also legal residents. This has resulted in even legal green card holders reporting fear of deportation.

Since Trump reclaimed the presidential position, U.S. law enforcement and political action have been accused of increasingly being used to target specific ethnic, legal, and identity groups, fostering an environment where a person’s perceived identity, rather than their constitutional status, determines their safety.

This is in line with the chilling “Make America Great Again” rhetoric, which critics argue has functioned as a thinly veiled call to reassert white and Christian dominance. Furthermore, there have been claims of identity discrimination, as people expressed being subjected to language suppression. For example, ICE has been accused of profiling Spanish speakers in Los Angeles, raising concerns about language-based discrimination.

This discrimination extends to professional and personal spheres, seen in cases of healthcare discrimination against specific ethnic groups. Trauma and tragedy are often expressed by a helpless public through humor, which is why countless ICE skits have cropped up on social media. 

Business compliance

When it comes to dismantling a nation where people are free to be diverse, the shutting down of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts sets a clear precedent. The start of Trump’s renewed time in power was met with a nationwide assault on DEI programs. (As a reminder, DEI programs were established to grant citizens equal opportunity in employment and education.)

Many of these publicly announced DEI rollbacks—from major companies like Walmart, McDonald’s, and Meta—have been criticized as acts of corporate self-censorship and preemptive compliance. Essentially, critics believe private entities are enforcing government-favored ideology to avoid retaliation.

Skeptics of the current government have voiced that political pressure can force businesses to bend the knee, leading to digital censorship by proxy. This means that vocal critics of the government—such as Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel—have faced speculation about political targeting or pressure.

It’s worth noting that everyone from media figures to journalists to business owners can feel the effects of pressure to comply, as they find their careers blocked if they step out of line. 

Institutions: For the people or for the president?

The ultimate threat to American rights moves beyond policy and targets the very institutions meant to protect all citizens: the Justice Department, the FBI, and the military. When the systems meant to uphold democracy are called into question, all American rights are essentially on the line. 

The U.S. is being led by a figure openly hostile to constitutional limits and surrounded by those who reinforce his claims with falsehoods and distortions. This environment enables the appointment of unqualified loyalists and “yes-men,” further eroding the institutional integrity essential for impartial justice. It also weakens the system of checks and balances that prevents any one branch (or individual) from accumulating unchecked power.

When loyalty becomes the primary qualification for leadership, the purpose of public institutions shifts from serving the people to serving the president. Law enforcement agencies, intelligence operations, and even the military risk becoming tools of political retaliation rather than guardians of democratic stability. Let’s break down exactly what this looks like at the moment.

Over-extension of power 

The executive branch currently claims and seeks direct control over the Justice Department, FBI, intelligence community, and military. This consolidation of authority blurs the line between independent enforcement and political loyalty, raising deep constitutional concerns.

In fact, 69 % of Americans say that Trump is trying to exert more power than past presidents—a perception widely viewed as dangerous for democratic norms. Here are some stats to consider: 

• 83% of Democrats and 24% of Republicans say Trump is trying to exert more presidential power—and that this is bad for the country.
• When it comes to executive orders, 51% of Americans say Trump is doing too much, while only 6% say he is doing too little. (27% say he is doing about the right amount, and 16% are unsure.)

A potential abuse of power clearly threatens American rights. This fear became apparent when the administration encouraged retaliation against perceived critics, including public calls for firings over online commentary and social media posts. For example, Vice President J.D. Vance urged the American public to report anyone who celebrated the death of controversial media personality Charlie Kirk to their employers. 

Furthermore, public criticism of the leadership—or anyone aligned with the administration—now carries real personal and professional risk. President Trump has even tweeted about which late-night hosts he’d like to see removed after Stephen Colbert’s show was canceled, spurring speculation over whether his influence extends into broadcast decisions.

Politicizing law enforcement

Beyond these chilling social signals, the politicization of law enforcement has taken tangible form. This worrisome trend extends to the deployment of the National Guard, which has increasingly been framed as a tool for political optics rather than public safety.

The use of federal forces to control protests or intimidate perceived opposition echoes the tactics of authoritarian regimes, where domestic military presence is used to signal dominance rather than ensure security.

Other examples include the public disparagement of FBI and DOJ officials who have resisted perceived political interference. There are also reports of attempts to replace senior law enforcement leaders with loyalists more aligned with the administration’s agenda. Each of these moves chips away at the impartiality of institutions designed to protect citizens equally under the law and uphold the American rights promised by the Constitution.

Institutional breakdown

Equally concerning are the appointments of arguably unqualified loyalists to positions of national importance. Figures such as Kash Patel and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. exemplify a governing philosophy based not on expertise but on ideological obedience.

Such government structures create an echo chamber that rewards loyalty and punishes dissent, threatening the rights of the American people from the inside out. Here are several examples of controversial Trump-appointed leaders: 

• Robert F. Kennedy Jr, the 26th United States Secretary of Health and Human Services, has a troubling history. He is a known anti-vaccine advocate and conspiracy theorist accused of promoting vaccine misinformation—such as the chemtrail conspiracy theory, HIV/AIDS denialism, and the scientifically disproved claim of a causal link between vaccines and autism.
• Kash Patel, the 9th Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, also has a slew of controversies. He started The Kash Foundation to help participants in the January 6 United States Capitol attack pay legal costs, and promoted numerous conspiracy theories about the deep state, including falsely claimed fraud in the 2020 presidential election, QAnon, COVID-19 vaccines, and the January 6 Capitol attack.
• Elon Musk was appointed for a controversial stint as a special government employee under the Trump administration, serving in an informal leadership role within the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an agency tasked with downsizing or “streamlining” federal operations. His appointment quickly blurred the line between private enterprise and public authority, while the results of his work were highly controversial.

Who is jeopardizing American rights?

Now it’s time to take a hard look at the 45th and 47th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump. The sitting president wields immense control over the Justice Department, the FBI, intelligence services, and the military—and has repeatedly tested the limits of that authority.

When examining the potential loss of American rights, many individuals share responsibility for the erosion of constitutional values. However, the current leader of the country is certainly most to blame. Trump’s administration has been marked by a disregard for constitutional norms, open hostility toward dissent, and frequent use of false or misleading claims to shape public perception.

Trump has been caught lying countless times, including his much-criticized claim blaming the pharmaceutical drug acetaminophen for causing autism—a statement widely debunked by medical experts and fact-checkers.

Despite a long record of public falsehoods, misrepresented statistics, and demonstrably misleading rhetoric, his supporters continue to interpret these distortions as proof of authenticity rather than deceit. (As an example, you can check out this list of 100 lies Trump told during his first 100 days in office.) 

Trump and his administration’s deliberate blurring of truth and propaganda mirrors a familiar authoritarian tactic: eroding a shared reality to consolidate power. Critics have described Trump’s following as “cultlike,” noting that his base often defends his statements unquestioningly—criticizing the same remarks only when they believe they come from someone outside their movement.

This dynamic reflects a dangerous shift from democratic engagement to blind allegiance, where loyalty to one man can outweigh loyalty to the Constitution.

Trumps’s constitutional disrespect

Perhaps no moment more vividly encapsulated the disregard for the Constitution and a downright disrespect to American rights than the January 6 Capitol attack, when then-President Trump’s rhetoric and failure to act decisively undermined the peaceful transfer of power—a cornerstone of American democracy.

In fact, the House of Representatives impeached Trump for incitement of insurrection one week after it occurred, making him the only U.S. president to be impeached twice. He even referred to the attack as “a day of love.”

Multiple congressional investigations and court findings have since taken place, with many believing his public statements and inaction contributed to the escalation of violence that day. The event exposed just how fragile the nation’s democratic safeguards can become when personal ambition outweighs constitutional duty.

The Capitol riot remains a lasting symbol of that breakdown—an image of citizens, emboldened by political misinformation, storming the seat of government to overturn a lawful election. Many consider it a turning point where democratic norms gave way to cult-like loyalty and disinformation.

In the years since, this erosion of truth has spread beyond politics. Major platforms and businesses now suppress speech not because it’s illegal, but because of political, economic, or advertiser pressure, reinforcing a culture of fear and compliance that silences dissent in the name of stability.

Closing words on American rights in 2025

It’s hard not to think American rights are being abolished—or at the very least threatened—when the United States is led by a figure who prizes loyalty over law and is surrounded by enablers who echo and amplify his falsehoods.

I will once again repeat a truth: The Trump administration does not live up to the full-fledged label of fascism. But it demonstrates proto-fascist tendencies. This is not a distant echo of authoritarian populism but a living demonstration of how democratic erosion begins—through intimidation, preemptive compliance, and the slow bending of institutions to the will of one individual.

And yet, the story of American democracy has never been one of inevitability; rather, it has always been one of resistance. Rights can be reclaimed when citizens refuse apathy. However, institutions must also rediscover their independence, and truth must once again become nonpartisan.

Ultimately, the survival of democracy depends not on one leader’s restraint but on the courage of the governed to demand accountability, uphold fact over fiction, and defend the freedoms that define the nation.

At the same time, it’s becoming increasingly apparent that the U.S. people have a long battle ahead of them until American rights are restored.

Continued reading: Cast with Caution: A Deep-Dive into Donald Trump’s Controversies

*Main photo by Mohamed elamine M’siouri