The Essence of Trumpism May Be the Assumption that Longstanding Practices of "Deep States" and the Like Have Created Continuing Emergencies

 

 

The essence of Trumpism is frequently defined by a deep distrust of established institutions and the narrative that they have created persistent, systemic crises. Proponents frame these institutions—often described as the "deep state"—as acting against the public's best interests, with this longstanding betrayal now coming to a head.

 

The "deep state" narrative

For Trump and his supporters, the "deep state" refers to career government officials and agencies—including the intelligence community, law enforcement, and regulatory bodies—that they claim operate independently and maliciously to thwart a president's agenda.

 

    Trump and loyalists view the bureaucracy as the adversary: Figures like Steve Bannon have explicitly called for the "deconstruction of the administrative state".

    A "phantom" of a beleaguered republic: While some political scientists argue the term is an American adaptation of a foreign concept, Trump used it effectively to frame government employees as a sinister, unaccountable force.

    A contrast with traditional views: Others, particularly critics of Trumpism, view these bureaucrats as a necessary part of the constitutional system of checks and balances, and as public servants acting in the public interest.

 

The concept of "continuing emergencies"

Trumpism frames various systemic problems—such as trade deficits, immigration challenges, or cultural shifts—not as complex issues but as urgent, existential crises caused by deep state incompetence or sabotage.

 

    Legitimizing unconventional actions: Framing problems as emergencies provides a justification for disregarding traditional political processes and norms, and taking extraordinary executive action.

    Weaponizing distrust: Trump leveraged and exacerbated existing public distrust in institutions for his political advantage, positioning himself as the only one who could fix the problems he claimed the "deep state" had created.

    Authoritarian populism: Critics have labeled this style as "authoritarian populism," where a strongman leader portrays himself as the defender of the people against corrupt, conspiring elites.

 

The political effect

By merging these two concepts—an insidious deep state and its perpetual emergencies—Trumpism creates a powerful political dynamic. It consolidates support by reinforcing the idea that only a leader with the authority to bypass the system can address the problems it has caused. This framing allows for the normalization of extreme actions and attacks on deep state institutions.

 

“You have the better of the argument with John Yoo about President Trump's "emergency" tariffs (Letters, Sept. 3). Mr. Yoo writes that the major questions doctrine is "merely a stand-in" for the nondelegation doctrine, and that because a 1936 Supreme Court decision excepted foreign-policy matters from the latter, such an exception must apply to the former. Yet the two doctrines are distinct -- and, apart from Justice Kavanaugh's brief musings in a lone concurrence, the court has never said whether there is a foreign-policy carve-out to the major questions doctrine.

 

In my judgment, the Trump administration has always contained two "wings" with respect to the tariffs. The "Navarro wing," after the president's trade-and-manufacturing adviser, emphasizes the foreign-policy elements of the levies. The "Bessent wing," acolytes of the Treasury secretary, focuses on the fiscal side. With each day, it seems as if the Bessent arguments have won, emphasizing that tariffs raise significant revenue. Thus, even if there is a foreign-policy exception to the major questions doctrine, the tariff question is vulnerable to an "exception to the exception" for matters that are predominantly fiscal.

 

That notwithstanding, Mr. Yoo's assumption that a longstanding condition such as the trade deficit can't be considered an "emergency" is treacherous. The essence of Trumpism may be the assumption that longstanding practices of "deep states" and the like have created continuing emergencies.

 

Prof. Stanley I. Langbein

 

University of Miami School of Law

 

Parkland, Fla.” [1]

 

1. Prof. Yoo Errs on Trump's 'Emergency' Tariffs. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 10 Sep 2025: A14.