The bad things that Trump has done this year
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
This year the Trump administration pursued a sweeping agenda that critics say includes aggressive immigration enforcement, expansive executive orders (218 EOs in 2025), military actions in the Caribbean, a broad “retribution” campaign against perceived opponents and high-profile clashes with courts and states — all of which have provoked legal challenges, congressional scrutiny and public concern [1] [2] [3] [4]. Polling and approval data show slippage on the economy and immigration, and multiple news outlets report bipartisan unease about the administration’s military posture and use of federal power [5] [6] [7].
1. Executive orders and a fast-moving policy shop
The administration signed an unusually large number of executive orders in 2025 — the Federal Register lists 218 EOs issued that year — signaling reliance on executive power to accomplish policy aims rather than waiting for congressional consensus [1]. That volume has fed concerns from critics and some lawmakers who say the administration is reshaping policy through directives that escape the slower legislative and oversight processes [1].
2. Immigration hard line and domestic deployments
The White House has tightened immigration enforcement and pursued measures that include reviewing "every single visa" and asylum claim, and deploying federal forces and Guard troops to enforce immigration rules — moves that prompted a federal judge to order the end of California National Guard deployment in Los Angeles and return control to state officials, reflecting legal friction over federal deployments used for immigration tasks [7] [2]. Those steps have generated statewide legal pushback and political controversy [2].
3. Military posture and incidents in the hemisphere
The administration increased U.S. military activity in the Caribbean, including the seizure of a Venezuelan oil tanker and escalated presence described as the largest in decades; senior lawmakers from both parties have condemned the tanker seizure and warned it risks dragging the U.S. toward wider conflict with Venezuela [2] [6]. Reporting shows bipartisan unease about an escalating military posture and questions about the legal and strategic rationale for specific strikes and seizures [7] [6].
4. National Security Strategy and ideological realignment abroad
The 2025 National Security Strategy openly supports courting Europe’s far right and frames a Western Hemisphere-first approach that some analysts call neo‑imperialist; Brookings and other commentators say the document makes explicit ideological aims that differed sharply from past NSS documents and signal a reorientation of U.S. foreign policy [8] [9]. The Guardian reported the NSS language characterizing immigration and EU integration as risks to Europe’s future and suggesting U.S. support for far-right resistance — a stance that has alarmed critics [8].
5. Campaign of retribution and use of government power
Investigative reporting by Reuters documents what it calls a "campaign of retribution" that has targeted at least 470 people, organizations and institutions since the president returned to office, portraying an administration effort to punish critics and reshape government institutions through investigations, firings and funding decisions [3]. That tally underpins concerns from watchdogs and civil servants about politicized personnel actions and the use of federal levers to settle scores [3].
6. Rhetoric, threats to judiciary and congressional reaction
House impeachment text and congressional reporting highlight instances of incendiary rhetoric — including calls for extreme punishments against judges in response to adverse rulings — and argue that confrontational language has coincided with a rise in threats against the federal judiciary [4]. Those developments have prompted lawmakers and judges to warn about risks to the rule of law and judicial independence [4].
7. Political and public fallout: approval slips and divided opinion
Polling from AP‑NORC and YouGov show the president’s approval on the economy and immigration slipping by about 10 points since March, with large partisan divides: many Democrats and independents rate the economy poorly while Republicans remain more positive [5] [10]. These data suggest the administration’s actions are producing political costs even as they solidify support among core backers [5] [10].
Limitations and competing perspectives
Available sources document many of these actions and reactions but do not uniformly assess legal outcomes or long-term effects; some White House fact sheets present the administration’s rationale and policy wins without the critical framing found in other outlets [11]. Supporters argue executive speed and aggressive measures are necessary to secure borders, confront adversaries and root out malfeasance; critics say those same actions abuse power, risk conflict and erode institutions — both views appear across the reporting [11] [3] [9].
If you want, I can produce a chronological timeline of the major actions and corresponding legal or political pushback this year using the same sources.