Democratic backsliding in the United States
[7][8] The Jim Crow era is among the most-cited historical examples of democratic backsliding, with Black Americans in particular seeing their rights eroded dramatically, especially in the southern United States.
[9] In the immediate aftermath of the American Civil War, the federal government of the United States initially took an active role in reducing racial discrimination.
[13] These amendments would have offered more sweeping protections but some Republican lawmakers wanted to limit their impact so that they would not apply to immigrants or poorer people in their districts.
[14] By the late 1870s, however, white backlash against the social, economic and political gains of Black people (exemplified by the violence and persecution they faced from terrorist groups like the Ku Klux Klan)[9] contributed to the Compromise of 1877, wherein the Democratic Party (then-dominated by Southern white supremacists)[15] agreed to let Republicans win the 1876 presidential election, in exchange for removing federal troops in the South and, in the words of historian James M. McPherson, "the abandonment of the black man to his fate.
"[10] Former supporters of Reconstruction era policies began to argue that the government had made "too many changes too fast", and a White conservative movement within the Republican Party also started to gain influence.
[24] In 2020, Kurt Weyland presented a qualitative model for assessing democratic continuity and reversal using historical data from the experience of other countries.
[25] In 2021, political scientists Matias López and Juan Pablo Luna criticized his methodology and selection of parameters and argued that both democratic continuity and reversal are possible.
[41][42] Aziz Huq and Behrouz Alikhani cited the growing political influence of the wealthy and global corporations with the loosening of campaign finance laws, especially the Citizens United Supreme Court decision.
[45] Tom Ginsburg and Bridgette Baldwin made similar arguments, citing the Supreme Court's role in shifting political power enough to enable authoritarianism.
[48] Levitsky and Ziblatt argue that the US Constitution is the most difficult in the world to amend "by a lot" and that this helps explain why the US still has so many undemocratic institutions that most or all other democracies have reformed.
On the other hand, it struck down the Voting Rights Act pre-clearance regime in Shelby County v. Holder (2013), which existed to prevent disenfranchisement by states.
As a whole, according to Huq, these changes shift the institutional equilibrium to "enable the replication of the system of one-party dominance akin to one that characterized the American South for much of the twentieth century".
[59] In a 2024 Vox article, Ian Millhiser describes the court as having become a partisan institution, giving itself more and more power to decide political questions.
By June 2022, participants in the alternate electors scheme began receiving subpoenas from the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack and the United States Department of Justice.
Through May 2022, Republican voters had nominated at least 108 candidates, in some 170 midterm races, who had repeated Trump's stolen election claims; at least 149 had campaigned on tightening voting procedures, despite the lack of evidence of widespread fraud.
[66] Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt in their 2018 book How Democracies Die analyze major modern presidential candidates against four key indicators of authoritarian behavior and found that Richard Nixon met one, George Wallace one, and Donald Trump all four.
[69] By 2021, polling and research indicated a significant shift against democracy among Republican voters, both in terms of rhetoric and acceptance of potential political violence.
A November 2021 Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) poll found that two-thirds of Republicans believed the election had been stolen, as did 82 percent of those who trusted Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Political scientist Larry Bartels, a co-director of the Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions at Vanderbilt University, wrote in August 2020 that "substantial numbers of Republicans endorse statements contemplating violations of key democratic norms, including respect for the law and for the outcomes of elections and eschewing the use of force in pursuit of political ends."
[70] A survey between 2017 and 2019 found a third of Americans want a "strong leader who doesn't have to bother with Congress or elections", and one-quarter had a favorable view of military rule.
[79] During the Trump era, a far-right, populist movement based on Christian nationalism surged, gaining a significant degree of mainstream acceptance, typified by the once-fringe New Apostolic Reformation.
In their 2022 book, The Flag and the Cross: White Christian Nationalism and the Threat to American Democracy, Gorski and co-author Samuel Perry, a professor of Sociology at the University of Oklahoma, wrote that white Christian nationalists share a set of common anti-democratic beliefs and principles that "add up to a political vision that privileges the tribe.
[81] During a September 2020 presidential debate, Trump was asked if he would condemn white supremacists and militia groups that had appeared at some protests that year.
[83] Every Republican voted against a July 2022 House measure requiring Homeland Security, the FBI and the Defense Department to "publish a report that analyzes and sets out strategies to combat white supremacist and neo-Nazi activity" in their ranks.
A 2019 survey of active service members found that about one third had "personally witnessed examples of white nationalism or ideological-driven racism within the ranks in recent months."
"[86][87] In September 2023, thirteen presidential centers dating from Herbert Hoover to Barack Obama released an unprecedented joint message warning of the fragile state of American democracy.
The statement called for a recommitment to the rule of law and civility in political discourse, as well as respect for democratic institutions and secure and accessible elections.
[95] In April 2023 as part of its Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation released its 920-page "Mandate for Leadership" that details comprehensive plans for the next Republican president to consolidate control over the executive branch.
Project 2025 proposes sweeping changes in the federal government relating to social and economic issues by cutting funding for, dismantling, or abolishing altogether major Cabinet departments and agencies, with the objective of placing their functions under the full and direct control of the president to impose an array of conservative policies on a national scale.
Announcing in June 2024 the formation of a task force to address Project 2025, Democratic congressman Jared Huffman characterized it as "an unprecedented embrace of extremism, fascism, and religious nationalism, orchestrated by the radical right and its dark money backers.
