Weekly Update: 7/15/2025

The Threat Index score remains at 56 for the fourth week in a row. It was last raised on June 26, following Trump’s rejection of his earlier isolationist stance in favor of direct military engagement. This week’s news offers further insight into the state of democratic institutions, the role of the courts, and the treatment of targeted groups—all key elements tracked by the Index.

One development in the separation of powers came this week from the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of McMahon v. New York. There, the Supreme Court once again used its emergency powers to overturn a lower court’s temporary order, a practice that was once rare but is now becoming the Supreme Court's favored procedure for helping the Trump administration avoid judicial oversight. The case involved the firing of nearly 1,500 employees from the Department of Education. The move was widely seen as an attempt to dismantle the Department of Education without congressional approval, as required by the Constitution. Lower courts had blocked the firings while a legal challenge played out. The Supreme Court’s emergency order lifted that pause, allowing the firings to proceed immediately without first deciding whether that is even legal. As is typical in such cases, the majority gave no explanation for its decision.

However, Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson issued a dissent, stating:

“When the Executive publicly announces its intent to break the law, and then executes on that promise, it is the Judiciary’s duty to check that lawlessness, not expedite it... Rather than maintain the status quo, however, this Court now intervenes, lifting the injunction and permitting the Government to proceed with dismantling the Department. That decision is indefensible. It hands the Executive the power to repeal statutes by firing all those necessary to carry them out. The majority is either willfully blind to the implications of its ruling or naive, but either way the threat to our Constitution’s separation of powers is grave.”

Meanwhile, in Southern California, immigration enforcement tactics were again in the spotlight. In Perdomo v. Noem, a federal judge issued a temporary order blocking Border Patrol and ICE agents from stopping day laborers and other workers based solely on race, accent, occupation, or other common traits that do not suggest immigration violations. (Full disclosure: several attorneys involved in the case are close allies of the Peace and Justice Law Center.)

The federal government’s response has been inconsistent. Homeland Security Secretary Noem claimed that agents do not rely on such vague characteristics. In contrast, “Border Czar” Tom Homan defended the practice and said agents would continue using it. In court filings, the government lawyers also made a sweeping legal argument: they claimed that under the recent Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. CASA, district court judges may not block widespread unlawful government actions within their districts unless every affected person is a plaintiff in the case. While Trump v. CASA was generally understood as addressing the issue of nationwide injunctions, the Trump administration now argues to extend that case even to rulings within a district court judge's own district.

These cases add to a growing pattern: the Trump administration has repeatedly worked around lower court decisions with support from the Supreme Court. Whether the administration complies with this latest order, defies it, or some combination remains to be seen. All of this is complicated by the fact-specific nature of immigration arrests, which will make compliance with the order hard to monitor. Even so, Perdomo v. Noem will likely prove significant for two areas of the threat Index: Erosion of Democratic Institutions and Rule of Law and Scapegoating and Persecution of Targeted Out-Groups.

On the other hand, we continue to watch for events that could lower the Threat Index score. The recent passage of the “Big, Beautiful Bill” marks a return to lawmaking through Congress, a sign of institutional stability that weighs in favor of lowering the Erosion of Democratic Institutions and Rule of Law score. In addition, the administration's decision not to release files related to Jeffrey Epstein has led to widespread anger and disillusionment within the MAGA movement. This reaction weighs in favor of lowering the Leadership Cult and Expectations of Loyalty criteria. However, as long as Trump continues to govern by unconstitutional executive orders, receives unwavering support from Republican leaders, and uses state power to punish rivals, those criteria will remain scored at 7 despite these recent events.