By Kenneth Tiven
The release of Badar Khan Suri, an Indian citizen and post-doctoral fellow at Georgetown University, after two months in ICE detention, has become a judicial flashpoint in America’s struggle to uphold constitutional rights under increasing political pressure.
Suri, detained as part of a Donald Trump-era crackdown on foreign students allegedly for his pro-Palestinian views, was freed unconditionally by US District Judge Patricia Giles, who said the government failed to provide sufficient evidence for his detention. More crucially, she emphasized that his continued incarceration risked creating a “chilling effect” on constitutionally protected speech.
His case mirrors others, including that of a Turkish graduate student arrested after writing about the Gaza-Israel conflict, signalling a broader pattern of civil liberties being undermined through immigration enforcement and executive overreach.
At the heart of these actions is President Trump’s widening assault on institutional checks—from the judiciary and the intelligence community to universities and the press. His administration’s repeated use of vague or arguably unlawful executive orders, often aimed at critics and dissenters, reflects a growing embrace of authoritarian governance.
George Orwell’s term “double-speak”—once used to describe the obfuscations of fascist regimes—now feels apt for Trump’s playbook. His appointees accuse opponents of “weaponizing” the law, even as they use federal power to punish dissent. Ed Martin, denied Senate confirmation for a senior post due to his role in the January 6 insurrection, now heads a special “anti-weaponization” office. He candidly stated the administration’s strategy: when charges can’t be made, convict opponents in the court of public opinion.
Loyalty often trumps competence. Tulsi Gabbard, now a top Trump ally, recently purged the leadership of the National Intelligence Council after it contradicted Trump’s claims that Venezuela’s government was directing the Tren de Aragua gang. That claim had been used to invoke the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan immigrants and imprison them in El Salvador. An ODNI spokesperson echoed the line: “The Director is working alongside President Trump to end the weaponization and politicization of the Intelligence Community.” Orwellian, indeed.
In a powerful essay in The Atlantic, conservative former federal judge J Michael Luttig warned that Trump’s true aim is unchecked power. “Not one of his signature initiatives… has the authority under the Constitution,” he wrote, listing unlawful deportations, birthright attacks, budget impoundments, media crackdowns, and efforts to control elections as examples of this creeping autocracy.
Meanwhile, economic policy under Trump continues to flail. His tariffs—promised as a manufacturing revival tool—have backfired. “The tariff rate is five times as high as when Trump took office,” economist Michael Strain told The Washington Post, “and we seem to have gotten nothing out of it”.
With Project 2025, a blueprint for right-wing governance, Trump-aligned Republicans push drastic cuts to social programmes. Congressional hearings have turned heated over plans to slash Medicaid, food aid, and regulatory protections, all while advancing tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy.
In his testimony to Congress, Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr struggled to defend the administration’s budget, angrily denying layoffs and funding cuts—despite 20,000 lost jobs and a $2.7 billion slash to NIH research. He has earned a new nickname in some circles: Secretary of Semantics.
The Supreme Court is now grappling with another Trump directive—his executive order targeting birthright citizenship. Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out that it violates four long-standing precedents. US Solicitor General D John Sauer defended it as “protecting the value of American citizenship.” But three federal judges have already blocked it, nationwide. The administration is now arguing that lower courts should no longer have the authority to issue such sweeping injunctions.
If that succeeds, it could fracture federal law into a state-by-state patchwork, echoing pre-Civil War divisions. The stakes are high, not only for immigration, but for the fundamental structure of American governance.
Judge Luttig remains cautiously optimistic. The courts, he says, are holding—for now. But he warns that Trump will continue his assault “until the American people finally rise up and say, No more.
—The writer has worked in senior positions at The Washington Post, NBC, ABC and CNN and also consults for several Indian channels