Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Does Trump's campus crackdown violate the First Amendment?
The Trump administration says it's defending free speech by confronting liberal bias on college campuses—but is it doing the opposite? On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters explains how the administration’s focus on elite universities has led to sweeping actions that may ultimately restrict speech, especially for foreign-born students. “These are not students who smashed windows or assaulted security guards,” Peters says. “It’s pretty hard to see how the administration can make the case that these people are national security threats.”
And the impact is already being felt. Peters points to advice from university officials telling students to avoid posting on social media out of fear that political expression might jeopardize their legal status. In Trump’s America, he argues, the First Amendment is being selectively applied—and for some communities, the price of speaking out may be higher than ever.
Watch full episode: The battle for free speech in Donald Trump's America
GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, the award-winning weekly global affairs series, airs nationwide on US public television stations (check local listings).
New digital episodes of GZERO World are released every Monday on YouTube. Don't miss an episode: subscribe to GZERO's YouTube channel and turn on notifications (🔔).GZERO World with Ian Bremmer airs on US public television weekly - check local listings.
The battle for free speech in Donald Trump's America
In the United States, the right to free speech is enshrined in the Constitution, but that doesn’t mean everyone agrees on what it looks like in practice. On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer opens with a landmark case: when neo-Nazis won the right to march through a Holocaust survivor community in Skokie, Illinois. The decision was controversial but helped define modern free speech as “ugly, uncomfortable, and messy,” yet fundamental to American democracy. Today, that foundational idea is once again being tested—on college campuses, in immigration courts, and in the rhetoric of both political parties.
Conservative legal scholar Ilya Shapiro argues that institutions once devoted to open inquiry are increasingly undermining that mission. “Universities have forgotten their basic responsibilities,” he says, citing unequal rule enforcement and what he calls an “illiberalism” that predates Trump but has intensified with political polarization. Shapiro supports the Trump administration’s aggressive scrutiny of elite universities but warns that some immigration-related free speech crackdowns risk overreach: “I'd prefer the administration go after clear immigration violations, not rely on vague designations like ‘harmful to foreign policy.’”
Meanwhile, New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters warns that the Trump administration’s tactics may do more harm than good. “Rather than executing clean policies that defend free speech,” he says, “they’re using blunt force to try to deport people who didn’t do anything terribly wrong.” Peters points to a growing “chilling effect,” especially among international students, who are now being advised to self-censor for fear of legal consequences. Both guests agree that university culture has played a role in the current crisis, but they differ sharply on whether the government’s response is upholding or threatening the First Amendment.
In America’s culture wars, free speech is no longer just a right—it’s a weapon, and both sides are wielding it.
GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, the award-winning weekly global affairs series, airs nationwide on US public television stations (check local listings).
New digital episodes of GZERO World are released every Monday on YouTube. Don't miss an episode: subscribe to GZERO's YouTube channel and turn on notifications (🔔).GZERO World with Ian Bremmer airs on US public television weekly - check local listings.
Free speech in Trump's America with NYT journalist Jeremy Peters and conservative scholar Ilya Shapiro
Listen: Free speech has become one of the most contentious issues in American politics, but what does it actually mean today? On the GZERO World podcast, Ian Bremmer sits down with conservative legal scholar Ilya Shapiro of the Manhattan Institute and New York Times free speech reporter Jeremy Peters. They discuss how free expression is being defined—and challenged—on university campuses and by the Trump administration, particularly when it comes to national immigration policy. “The dynamic of ‘free speech for me but not for thee’ is prevalent,” Shapiro warns, pointing to inconsistent enforcement of campus speech rules and a broader “illiberalism” taking hold in higher education.
The conversation turns to the Trump administration’s aggressive response to Israel/Gaza protests, including efforts to penalize non-citizen students for their political speech. Peters cautions that this approach may violate the very rights the administration claims to defend. “Rather than execute a clean policy to support free speech,” he says, “they’re using blunt force to try to deport people who didn’t do anything terribly wrong.” The potential legal battles ahead could determine how far the government can go in defining speech as a national security issue, especially for non-citizens.
Both guests acknowledge that antisemitism on campus has become a flashpoint, but differ on how it’s being addressed. Shapiro argues that while not all anti-Israel sentiment is antisemitic, many protesters are crossing that line: “It’s possible to be anti-Zionist without being antisemitic, but it’s very rare in my experience.” Peters agrees the issue is complex and evolving, noting that universities “seem much more focused on preventing antisemitism than they were just a year ago.” Together, the guests raise urgent questions about the balance between expression, identity, and institutional responsibility in a sharply divided political landscape.
How did 'free speech' become a partisan weapon in America?
In the United States today, the right to free speech is enshrined in the Constitution, but that doesn’t mean everyone agrees on what it looks like in practice. On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer opens with a landmark case: when neo-Nazis won the right to march through a Holocaust survivor community in Skokie, Illinois. The decision was controversial but helped define modern free speech as “ugly, uncomfortable, and messy,” yet fundamental to American democracy. Today, that foundational idea is once again being tested—on college campuses, in immigration courts, and in the rhetoric of both political parties.
Republicans have embraced free speech as a culture war rallying cry, using it to combat what they see as liberal censorship on college campuses and social media. Donald Trump even signed an executive order on his first day back in office aimed at curbing government interference in free speech. But Democrats argue that the same administration is now weaponizing federal power, targeting foreign students, threatening university funding, and punishing dissenting voices in ways that undermine the very freedoms it claims to defend.
Both parties claim to be protecting free speech, just not the same kind.
GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, the award-winning weekly global affairs series, airs nationwide on US public television stations (check local listings).
New digital episodes of GZERO World are released every Monday on YouTube. Don't miss an episode: subscribe to GZERO's YouTube channel and turn on notifications (🔔).GZERO World with Ian Bremmer airs on US public television weekly - check local listings.
Preet Bharara on the legal troubles of former President Trump
The rule of law is a cornerstone of democracy. Ensuring that everyone is treated equally in the eyes of the law, including public officials, is a critical component of a healthy, thriving democratic government. On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer speaks with former US Attorney for the Southern District of NY and podcast host Preet Bharara to delve into the legal struggles of former President Trump. There is a strong possibility Trump will face a criminal trial as he runs for president in 2024, so the stakes have never been higher.
Bharara shares his analysis of the potential implications for executive privilege and its impact on democracy. In his wide-ranging conversation with Bremmer, they also explore the legal aspects of other news topics, including the ethical controversy surrounding Clarence Thomas and the ongoing Department of Justice investigation into the Ukraine leak.
Note: this interview appeared in an episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer on April 17, 2023, "Parsing Donald Trump's indictment
- Could Trump win the presidency even if convicted of a crime? ›
- Parsing Donald Trump's indictment ›
- Podcast: Trumped up charges? The law & politics of investigating a president's crimes ›
- Bharara: Clarence Thomas' donor trips may not be illegal, but not a good look ›
- Trump sexual abuse verdict won't hurt him with GOP - GZERO Media ›
- Trump's VP pick: The short list - GZERO Media ›
- Podcast: Will Trump's criminal conviction ruin his campaign - or American democracy? - GZERO Media ›
Could Trump win the presidency even if convicted of a crime?
What if a US presidential candidate were found guilty of a crime, yet still actively campaigned for the highest office in the land? On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer and Preet Bharara, former US attorney for the Southern District of New York, explored that scenario for former President Donald Trump, who just got indicted in New York but is running again in 2024.
Bharara revealed that Trump could still run for and potentially even win the presidency, despite being "pending trial, charged, or convicted," and even end up in prison." However, he warned, with no legal precedent, there are implications for how we think about the rule of law and the standard of justice for everyone, as well as the US electoral system.
The former federal prosecutor, who was fired by Trump, says the former president is unlikely to face jail due to his age, lack of criminal record, and severity of the charges. There's also the issue of his Secret Service protection.
Bharara speculated that Trump might try to manipulate the threat of prosecution to garner sympathy and portray himself as a victim of political persecution, a tactic that may help him in the short-term, but could have far-reaching implications for the future of American democracy.
Watch this episode of GZERO World: Parsing Donald Trump's indictment
China's Zero-Covid, Elections in Brazil, Cold War 2.0: Your Questions, Answered
China's zero-COVID, elections in Brazil, Cold War 2.0: Your Questions, Answered
Summer is over, and with it, this summer’s mailbag series is coming to an end.
After over 1,000 questions and exactly 100 answers (I am on vacation, after all), it’s been a pleasure.
Note: This is the fifth and final installment of a five-part summer mailbag series responding to reader questions. You can find the first part here, the second part here,, the third part here, and the fourth part here. Some of the questions that follow have been slightly edited for clarity. If you have questions you want answered, ask them in the comments section below or follow me on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn and look out for future AMAs.
A worker wearing protective gear walks next to barriers that separate from the street a neighborhood in lockdown as a measure against Covid-19. (Hector Retamal/AFP via Getty Images)
Want to understand the world a little better? Subscribe to GZERO Daily by Ian Bremmer for free and get new posts delivered to your inbox every week.
Why is Xi Jinping so committed to zero-Covid? Would using other nations' vaccines be so devastating to their nationalistic rhetoric that they have to sacrifice years of being in lockdown? What exactly do you think Xi's game plan is? (Sheng T)
Because China was complacent for two years after having massive initial success containing the virus…and in the meantime, Covid changed dramatically. Now it’s too late—if they open up suddenly, with most people having no immunity from prior infection and only moderate vaccine immunity (due to only moderate vaccination rates and poor vaccine effectiveness against the newer variants), China’s hospitals would quickly get overwhelmed and millions would likely die. They can’t import foreign vaccines without losing tremendous face because they so played them up as inferior to homegrown ones. So they’re locked in until they develop effective mRNA vaccines and stockpile enough therapeutics to offset elderly vaccine hesitancy. And that’s not happening until well into 2023.
Can we expect Europe to move away from fossil fuel (and Russian gas) reliance by going nuclear? It seems like a no-brainer in the long term despite its steep implementation costs. (Marcelo F)
No—it’s not a singular fix. There’s lots of popular opposition to nuclear in Europe, and France’s experience isn’t ideal (nuclear there has proven to be expensive, and nearly 50% of capacity is presently offline due to maintenance and other challenges). But it’s certainly a part of the solution, along with greater energy efficiency, diversification of sources for fossil fuels in transition, and renewables.
What will it take to decarbonize the U.S. economy quickly? (Zoe L)
We’ve come a long way already. Per capita carbon emissions in the U.S. are currently roughly what they were in the 1940s, in large part because we’ve successfully transitioned from coal to natural gas. Going forward, the key driver of further decarbonization will be investments in new technology, and in making existing technologies (solar, wind, EVs, batteries) cheaper. The misnamed “Inflation Reduction Act” will make a significant difference in that regard. Personally, I’d really love to see a nuclear fusion breakthrough. The efforts feel more serious this time around…
Do you think India's democracy will survive the next 25 years? (Classmate A)
Yes. The bigger question is whether the world’s governments will still be the principal actors on the global stage in 50 years. About that, I’m not so sure…
What would be the long-term implications of a permanently split Ukraine? (Ramsey T)
Depends on the nature of the split and whether Ukrainians accept it as a baseline. A return to pre-February 24 borders would be a split (Crimea would stay Russian) but one that could potentially lead to peace. Short of that, it’s hard to imagine an end to hostilities. I worry about what this means for Russia long term. They’ve made themselves into an Iran-like rogue state… but with 6,000 nuclear warheads. Not good for the world.
What do you think about John J. Mearsheimer’s prediction on Ukraine? Could this dreadful war have been avoided? (Andrea P)
I think he’s fixated on blaming the West. Yes, the West made all sorts of errors. We didn’t make an effort to integrate Russia into the West after the Cold War, and we didn’t hit the Russians hard enough for their invasions of Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014. Ultimately, though, this war is on Putin, not the West.
How do you evaluate Turkey’s position on the Russia-Ukraine war? (Burak P)
Overall it’s been constructive, especially on the food security front. But it’s also been highly opportunistic, cognizant of the opportunities the war provides to rehabilitate Turkey’s image and relatively poor diplomatic/geostrategic standing.
When will the war in Ukraine end? (Victor C)
No time soon, I’m afraid.
What is China doing right, if anything? How can West learn to do the same? (Asad F)
They are investing massively in STEM education, high-tech industries, and green energy technologies. The United States is finally starting to do this with the CHIPS Act and the “Inflation Reduction Act,” but we’re behind the curve. Another advantage China has is its political system tends to promote leaders on the basis of meritocracy. The US political system, not so much (though in part that’s because it’s nowhere near as powerful or consequential).
When you look at the Ukraine war and the conflict in Northern Ethiopia, do you think we are at the beginning of Cold War 2.0? (Isahaq A)
Yes—specifically in terms of NATO and the G-7 versus Russia. And it has elements of a hot war, even. But it’s not a global cold war like we experienced before the Soviet collapse, and it’s certainly not a fight among equals. Russia’s allies are Belarus and a couple of minor rogue states. That’s it. Not even Kazakhstan, which is supporting US/EU sanctions. Europe is united on one side of the Iron Curtain. China’s “friendship without limits” with Russia has turned out to be a friendship without very many benefits. And developing countries want nothing to do with a new cold war and will continue to do business both with the West and with Russia.
Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro has been compared with former U.S. president Donald Trump.(Jim Lo Scalzo-Pool/Getty Images)
What do you think about the upcoming elections in Brazil? Will there be consequences on the global stage? (Bernardo S)
It’s Lula’s to lose, although the race will tighten in coming weeks as the economy improves. In terms of policy, Lula and Bolsonaro aren’t exactly polar opposites on economics, where they are both more moderate than their rhetoric would seem to indicate. That means there should be broad continuity regardless of who wins. The big difference globally would be on climate, where Lula is much more aligned with other governments around the world. A big question is whether when Bolsonaro (likely) loses he will attempt to delegitimize and overturn the election the way Trump did in 2020. If he does, the chances he’ll succeed are minimal (the military and the courts would defend the rule of law), but it could still lead to a lot of violence. That’d be very destabilizing for Latin America’s largest economy.
Every democratically elected national leader appears to face record-low approval ratings and an upcoming, near-certain defeat at the ballot. Has this level of unrest at a global level ever happened before? What are the implications of such volatility? (Jack S)
It’s true that there seems to be a lot more populism and anti-establishment sentiment than in the recent past, which strongly suggests that the social contract in democracies isn’t working and needs to be redressed, or else democratic governance will start seriously crumbling. But keep in mind this is much more of a problem in the United States than, say, Canada, Germany, or Japan. So I wouldn’t overgeneralize or panic just yet.
Is globalization over? (Tiago S)
Not at all. While there’s some decoupling going on (between Russia and the West, between the US and China on areas of national security, by “my country first” populists around the world trying to score political points), the extent of it is limited by economic self-interest. In fact, the world is still the most integrated it’s ever been. But globalization is no longer being actively driven by the United States (or anyone else). That means that it’s being fought over, not that it’s over. The economic drivers of globalization are just too powerful.
Are we headed into a cold war with China? What are your expectations for the Sino-American relationship in the long term? (Johnny K)
No. There’s too much economic interdependence between the two countries, and both sides are well-aware that war would be mutually assured destruction. But there’s enormous uncertainty in the long-term relationship, which is entirely devoid of trust. Both countries are facing massive domestic challenges. China’s are primarily economic (though they could become political as well). America’s are primarily political (though they could become economic as well). If these two developments keep getting worse, we’ll likely see more conflict.
Is it true you grew up in the projects? What lessons did that teach you? (Allan S)
Yes. It’s hard to know for sure how the experience shaped me in the absence of a counterfactual, but off the top of my head: it motivates me to work hard, it makes me recognize the importance of understanding networks/stakeholders and not presuming performance alone gets you where you want to go, and it gives me an outsider perspective that is useful for being clear-minded about the advantages and disadvantages of different systems (as opposed to thinking that everything should run like the “Washington consensus”).
How do you find passion when it comes to work? (Steven T)
The subject matter—the state of our world and, most importantly, the people on it—is endlessly fascinating. And given that we’re in a period of nearly unprecedented uncertainty—a real transition point for the world—the work feels meaningful.
How do U.S. allies around the world see U.S. division and the upcoming elections in 2022 and 2024? How do they prepare for what may be coming? (Linda B)
They’re deeply, deeply concerned. The Europeans are working to strengthen the EU and related institutions to get some “strategic autonomy” from the U.S., should they need it. Some Asian allies are hedging or balancing toward China. While some U.S. allies like Canada, Japan, and the United Kingdom largely have no choice but to stick with us, albeit each for different reasons.
What will it take to repair American democracy and restore its standing as the beacon of democratic ideals in the world? (Max B)
It will take a generation of hard work. Specifically, we need to invest in improving equality of opportunity for Americans who no longer have the mobility of their parents and grandparents, and we need to take money out of the political system to better align incentives for the public good.
With all the uncertainty (economics) and conflict (international relations) currently, what gives you the most hope? (Christian G)
That this is precisely the time when we get to rebuild our 20th-century global institutions to make them fit for the (first half of the) 21st century. That’s a terrific opportunity we should not waste.
What is the meaning of life? (Stefen S)
To keep a sense of wonder about our existence. For me, philosophically, that means keeping an open mind and never stopping asking myself that very question.
🔔 And if you haven't already, don't forget to subscribe to my free newsletter, GZERO Daily by Ian Bremmer, to get new posts delivered to your inbox.

No second-class citizens: the challenge of diversity in democracy
In his new book The Great Experiment, political scientist Yascha Mounk digs into how tough it is for very diverse democracies to treat all their citizens equally. The price to pay if it goes wrong is high: society falls apart.
The US faces many ongoing challenges, especially on race relations, but has done much better in some areas than was predicted decades ago – for example, the increasing frequency of interracial marriages, Mounk tells Ian Bremmer.
Where America has made much less progress, Mounk admits, is on racial disparities in wealth — which he says is the deepest problem we have in the US today. Still, "it's important to see the nuances": accumulating wealth takes long, and the income gap between Black and white Americans has been reduced in recent decades.
"There is a real pocket of poverty because of [the] long-term structural impacts of all the injustice in American history ... but the modal experience of African Americans today is hopeful," Mounk says. "And actually, when you ask African Americans how they feel about the American Dream, how they feel about the future of America, they are more optimistic than white Americans."
Watch the GZERO World episode: Authoritarians gone wild