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 }}
Graphic Truth: Federal employment already dropping
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed President Donald Trump to proceed with widespread cuts to the federal workforce, pending a full trial, overruling a San Francisco judge’s order in May that temporarily blocked layoffs at 22 agencies. Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, thousands of government employees had been preparing for mass layoffs, with many notified of their pending terminations but awaiting official confirmation.
Here’s a look at the changing size of the federal workforce, which includes the US military, since Trump first took power in 2017.
President Trump takes on the Judiciary
From Supreme Court rulings on deportations and birthright citizenship to federal troop deployments in Los Angeles, the courts are becoming ground zero for challenges to executive authority. Emily Bazelon tells Ian Bremmer that the judiciary can’t save American democracy alone—and with Congress sidelined and the DOJ increasingly politicized, checks and balances are wearing thin. “The judges cannot save the country from an authoritarian president… by themselves."
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 (🔔).
Yale Law School's Emily Bazelon on Trump's showdown with the courts
Listen: President Trump has never been shy about his revolutionary ambitions. In his second term, he’s moved aggressively to consolidate power within the executive branch—signing more than 150 executive orders in just over 150 days, sidelining Congress, and pressuring the institutions that were designed to check his authority. His supporters call it common sense. Critics call it dangerous. Either way, it’s a fundamental shift in American governance—one that’s unlike anything happening in any other major democracy.
While Congress has largely collapsed into partisan submission, and the DOJ and other power ministries face political purges, one institution still stands: the courts. In this episode, Ian Bremmer speaks with New York Times Magazine staff writer and Yale Law School’s Emily Bazelon about how the judiciary is holding up under pressure, what rulings to watch, and whether the rule of law can survive the Trump revolution.
Subscribe to the GZERO World Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published
President Trump has launched a revolution. Will it succeed?
President Donald Trump calls himself a revolutionary—and I actually agree with him. His second term has ushered in sweeping attempts to expand executive power and defang oversight institutions. Congress has rolled over. The DOJ? Under pressure. The only remaining institutional check appears to be the courts—especially the lower ones. So far, federal judges across the country, including some Trump appointees, have pushed back on illegal overreach. As has the Supreme Court on some high profile immigration and trade cases. But what happens when Trump gets tired of losing in court?
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 (🔔).
Was it legal for Trump to deploy federal troops to Los Angeles?
In this clip from a larger interview for the latest episode of GZERO World, New York Times Magazine staff writer and Yale Law School fellow Emily Bazelon sits down with Ian Bremmer to unpack President Trump’s unprecedented decision to send National Guard troops and US Marines into Los Angeles without the governor’s consent. She argues the administration may have intentionally provoked the unrest through targeted immigration raids in the Latino neighborhoods of a densely populated city.
As California Governor Gavin Newsom sues the federal government, Bazelon makes clear that legal recourse may be limited. Even if Newsom wins, she says, Trump could comply with consultation requirements after the fact and proceed as planned. “The judges cannot save the country from an authoritarian president... by themselves,” Bazelon warns.
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 (🔔).
Lee Jae-myung, the presidential candidate of the Democratic Party, speaks during a policy agreement ceremony with the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions at the Korea Press Center in Seoul, South Korea, on May 1, 2025.
South Korean court throws likely next president into jeopardy
South Korean opposition leader Lee Jae-myung had a rough day on Thursday. The Supreme Court sent the election law case against him back to a lower court, a move that could extend the country’s political chaos. Lee is the favorite to win the June 3 election, but he could be ousted from office if the court rules against him weeks, months, or even years down the line.
The legal circumstances are murky. If elected, Lee might claim that he’s constitutionally protected from prosecution. But the constitution only gives the sitting president immunity against indictment for crimes — other than treason, as impeached former President Yoon Suk-yeol knows all too well. Lee has already been indicted, setting up a contentious debate if the courts rule against him, according to Eurasia Group’s Jeremy Chan.
“The conservatives will be saying that he clearly committed this crime and was charged before he became president, and the punishment is that he’s not allowed to seek public office, which would invalidate this whole election,” says Chan. “The left will be saying that the highest law in the land says very specifically that the president should be immune from these types of charges, and should focus on governing.”
The conservative ruling party is still reeling from Yoon’s impeachment after his quixotic attempt at a military coup in December. Nonetheless, acting President Han Duck-soo resigned on Thursday to make way for his own bid for the top job, despite grim polling numbers. The Joong Ang Daily, a conservative paper, found 42% of voters are leaning toward Lee, while only 13% back Han.
Then again, given the sword of Damocles hanging over Lee, Han might be willing to roll the dice.
Salvadoran police officers escort an alleged member of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua recently deported by the U.S. government to be imprisoned in the Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) prison, as part of an agreement with the Salvadoran government, in Tecoluca, El Salvador, in this handout image obtained March 16, 2025.
Where does Trump’s immigration crackdown stand, nearly 100 days in?
President Donald Trump’s actions against migrants have generated among the most controversy of any of his policies during the first few months of his presidency. His administration’s deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members to a Salvadoran maximum security facility has drawn comparisons to the worst abuses of totalitarian regimes, and Trump’s approval rating on immigration issues has slipped a bit in several polls.
Here’s a brief rundown of three of the most salient actions Trump has taken on migration.
1. Mass deportations of alleged criminal migrants
In March, the Trump administration defied court orders to remove over 200 Venezuelan migrants whom it alleged – without providing proof or due process – were criminals without legal status in the United States. The White House claimed it had the authority to do so thanks to the 1789 Alien Enemies Act, which it invoked to target the Tren de Aragua, a gang it alleges to be conducting “irregular warfare and undertaking hostile actions against the United States.”
The Supreme Court ruled on April 8 that while the administration could use this act to deport alleged gang members, it must provide them the opportunity to challenge their removals in court first. Eleven days later, it ruled that the administration must halt deportations under the Alien Enemies Act pending a further ruling from the court. The White House derided challenges as “meritless litigation” – even though it admitted in one case, that of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, it mistakenly deported him to a potential life sentence in El Salvador. Despite another Supreme Court ruling that the administration must facilitate his return to the United States, the administration says it cannot retrieve him from El Salvador.
2. Executive Order “Protecting the American People Against Invasion”
Trump issued this broad executive order, aka PAPAI, within hours of his inauguration. It revokes several Biden-era executive orders related to immigration and attempts to further the crackdown Trump promised on the campaign trail.
For example, it removed restrictions on immigration authorities attempting to make arrests at sensitive locations like churches, schools, or certain workplaces. It urges state and local law enforcement to aid in immigration arrests, which are usually outside their jurisdictions, and threatens so-called sanctuary cities with the loss of federal funds if they do not assist. The order also mandates the creation of “Homeland Security Task Forces” in each state, reporting to the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security. These task forces are meant to marshall more manpower and resources to make arrests, but the White House has expressed frustration with the pace of detentions.
3. Militarized border protection
In another executive order signed on his first day in office, Trump declared a national emergency on the southern border, enabling military forces to take a greater role in securing the region. He also assigned the Roosevelt Reservation, a 60-foot wide strip of land running along much of the border from New Mexico to California, to the Defense Department. DoD has announced it will administer part of the reservation as a section of Fort Huachuca, a military base in Arizona. Doing so will allow military personnel to put up barriers and make arrests as part of their security duties, but those actions are likely to be challenged in court.
Despite – or perhaps because of – the crackdown along the border, apprehensions are way down compared to the Biden administration. Authorities detained just 11,017 attempted migrants along the southern border in March 2025 compared to 189,359 in March 2024.
US Supreme Court
US Supreme Court stays deportation of Venezuelan migrants – for now
The US Supreme Court issued a decision early Saturday temporarily halting the Trump administration’s imminent deportation of Venezuelan migrants. The men, accused of belonging to criminal gangs, were to be removed under the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 law usually used in wartime.
Instead, the justices instructed the government “not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court.” Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
What was the basis for the decision? Time. While the Supreme Court had upheld the use of the statute in other cases, it required that deportees have adequate time to contest their removal. The American Civil Liberties Union claimed that in this case the men had not had adequate time to do so: Detainees were told they would be removed that evening or the next day, and some had reportedly already been loaded onto buses.
What’s next? In response, on Saturday afternoon the Trump administration asked the justices to reject the migrants’ stay after its additional review. There was no indication that the administration would defy the Supreme Court in the meantime – a move that would have sparked a constitutional crisis.