The White House Watch newsletter offers insights into the implications of the 2024 U.S. election for Washington and the global community. Recently, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney expressed a firm stance against former U.S. President Donald Trump’s aspirations regarding Canada, stating, “We will never, ever, in any way, shape or form be part of the United States.” Carney dismissed the notion as absurd and straightforward. This sentiment would be unusual coming from a U.S. governor, Ivy League university president, or Fortune 500 CEO, though they might share Carney’s sense of defiance. Many American leaders have remained silent amid turbulent political times, despite previous praise for the founding of the U.S. republic. The saying goes that liberty exists when the government fears the people, but tyranny ensues when people fear the government. There is an apprehension within the U.S. establishment about challenging formidable political forces.
Elsewhere, prominent figures in other struggling democracies have been similarly reserved. In India and Turkey, business leaders did little to oppose leadership actions that restricted civil freedoms. Hungarian resistance to Viktor Orbán’s institutional changes has been minimal. In contrast, American civil society is notably robust, with power traditionally dispersed widely, but opposition to Trump appears hindered by a collective action issue, where speaking out alone risks backlash. Nonetheless, safety could be found in numbers.
The reluctance of corporate and civic leaders to speak publicly, likely due to fear, is evident in the difficulty journalists face in obtaining on-the-record comments. Some exceptions exist, such as Georgetown Law School’s Dean William Treanor, who resisted pressure from a Trump attorney regarding his curriculum. Judges have also delayed Trump’s more extreme measures, like claiming the authority to deport certain permanent residents or label domestic enemies under wartime legislation. While these actions present obstacles, Trump has not yet faced significant barriers.
Judicial pressure mounts as prominent figures, including the president, vice president, and influential voices like JD Vance, Elon Musk, and media outlets, call for judicial impeachments. Although some Trump statements, such as proposed military actions, are not widely repeated, criticisms of judges are echoed throughout his circle, framing them as protectors of criminals and terrorists.
Musk’s criticisms of judges as threats to democracy, although previously laughable given his non-elected status versus Congress’s authority, now pose more serious concerns. Alarming tactics such as delivery of anonymous packages to judges’ homes resemble scenes from mafia movies, implying threats toward these officials.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer faced pressure, canceling a book tour purportedly due to security reasons, though acknowledging the broader democratic crisis could have been more effective. In political maneuvering, Schumer recently yielded to Trump’s terms to keep the government operating, diminishing Democrat’s leverage. This move coincided with Trump’s dismantling of significant media infrastructure, like the Voice of America broadcaster. Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy has warned that continued adherence to normal political conduct might endanger democracy.
Conversely, other Democrats seem less attuned, with California Governor Gavin Newsom focusing on a podcast featuring Republican guests, potentially eyeing future political aspirations. Newsom’s actions suggest a lack of awareness regarding the republican fragility or a pursuit of personal gain, with unclear intentions raising concerns about his motivations during a precarious political era.
