Articles for tag: Autoritärer Populismus, Autoritarismus, Donald Trump

Trump’s Manufactured Emergencies

The Trump administration’s actions in Washington D.C. represent the continuation of interconnected political and rhetorical tactics that the president has used since his second inauguration that we should expect to see again and again – using misleading or downright fabricated information as the basis for declaring an emergency, relying on the fabricated emergency to invoke emergency legal authorities, and then relying on those authorities to take actions that exceed even the broad powers that such emergencies confer under the law. Looking ahead, we can expect the administration to run this same playbook in additional, predictable ways.

22. August 2025

, ,

Weaponising Disqualification

On August 20, 2025, the Indian Government introduced three constitutional amendment bills of massive implications in the Parliament. Together, the bills aim to establish a mandatory legal sanction providing that any minister can be removed from their ministerial office if arrested or detained for thirty consecutive days on charges carrying a potential sentence of five years or more. At first glance, the bills may seem laudatory, founded on the expectation of ethical standards for high constitutional office. Yet, one can clearly anticipate the gross impending misuse of this law towards establishing a hegemonic BJP rule in India.

22. August 2025

, ,

Zart im Nehmen

Autoritär-populistische Kräfte instrumentalisieren das Strafrecht, um Macht zu festigen, Gegner:innen zu markieren und die öffentliche Ordnung in ihrem Sinne zu inszenieren, während das Strafrecht zugleich demokratische Prozesse und Grundrechte schützt. Diese doppelte Funktion birgt Spannungen: Zu starke Eingriffe riskieren, selbst demokratiegefährdend zu werden. Das Strafrecht agiert damit zwischen wehrhafter Verteidigung der Demokratie und politischer Vereinnahmung.

13. August 2025

, , , ,

Anti-Feminism versus Abusive Feminism

Some of the world’s most powerful leaders have openly embraced an agenda that is overtly hostile to diversity, equity and inclusion, and often overtly anti-feminist. These discursive and behavioral attacks have been accompanied by a range of anti-feminist policy changes. As liberalism and democracy often erode together, it is no surprise that the growth of anti-feminism is associated with democratic backsliding. What is more surprising is that many of these anti-feminist, would-be autocrats have engaged in a parallel set of tactics that appear to endorse, rather than challenge, certain feminist ideas.

8. August 2025

, , , , ,

Haunted by Text

Slovak PM Fico renewed his attempts to amend Slovakia’s Constitution. The most controversial provisions are a “national identity safeguard” limiting the effect of international and supranational law, and a definition of sex as strictly binary. After securing backing from some opposition members, his cabinet has submitted the amendment to parliament for debate and a vote. While public mobilisation against the proposed amendment proposal is important, legal scholars and NGOs should avoid using language that might reinforce the perception that the formally powerful Constitutional Court lacks the authority to strike down or reinterpret such changes in line with constitutional values.

23. Juni 2025

, , ,

Legalising Authoritarianism through Pakistan’s Supreme Court

On 7 May 2025, Pakistan’s Supreme Court overturned its own previous judgment from October 2023 that had declared military trials of civilians unconstitutional. The newly constituted Constitutional Bench reinstated clauses of the Pakistan Army Act that allow for the prosecution of civilians in military courts. The ruling was justified on national security grounds, citing the need to prosecute attacks by civilians on military installations, a rationale that conflates dissent with terrorism and bypasses the safeguards of civilian legal processes. This decision not only reverses prior precedent but also marks a troubling endorsement of military jurisdiction over civilian matters, raising fundamental concerns about the erosion of judicial independence and the rule of law.

18. Juni 2025

, , , ,

Beyond Legal Restoration

A recently published proposal by former Constitutional Court judge Béla Pokol suggests introducing a new emergency regime designed to defend Hungary’s illiberal system against potential re-democratization efforts by a future government. Together with international criticism of Poland’s judicial reform in its process of democratic renewal, this provokes a profound reckoning: traditional legal formalism may no longer serve the needs of constitutional recovery. It is time for a post-formalist approach to democratic reconstruction.

17. Juni 2025

, , , , ,

Delegitimierung als Strategie

Nach den Eilentscheidungen des Berliner Verwaltungsgerichts, das die Zurückweisung von drei Asylsuchenden an der deutsch-polnischen Grenze für rechtswidrig erklärte, wurden die drei beteiligten Richterinnen und Richter Ziel heftiger Diffamierungen und Bedrohungen im Netz. Dies mag zunächst nur wie polemische Kritik erscheinen, die – wie alle populistische Rhetorik – auf „das Volk“ rekurriert, das einer vermeintlich korrupten Elite gegenübersteht. Bei genauerer Betrachtung zeigt sich jedoch, dass Angriffe dieser Art Teil systematischer Bestrebungen sind, die Legitimität der unabhängigen Justiz zu untergraben.

16. Juni 2025

, , , ,

Troops in L.A.

This past weekend, President Donald Trump issued a presidential memorandum that federalized National Guard troops and deployed those troops alongside active-duty marines in response to protests against his aggressive immigration enforcement operations in Los Angeles. While framed as a response to violence, the order also addresses peaceful protest. The decision to send military forces against civilians engaged in protected First Amendment activity marks a dangerous escalation, raising serious legal and constitutional concerns.

13. Juni 2025

, , , , ,

The Nondelegation Case Against Trump’s New Travel Ban

Donald Trump has imposed the second travel ban of his presidential history. Despite the enormous harm it is likely to cause, many assume there is no effective way to challenge it in court. The Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. Hawaii (2018) – addressing Trump’s first-term “Muslim ban” – probably precludes challenges based on discriminatory intent. Nonetheless, there is an alternative path to striking down the new travel ban: the nondelegation doctrine. This doctrine sets limits to Congress’s delegation of legislative authority to the executive.

13. Juni 2025

, , , , , , ,