Constitutional Crisis or Unchecked Deep State?
February 19, 2025data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a9f77/a9f775fc45d7fd2373c1cc5015b38cef3ec197f9" alt="Constitutional Crisis or Unchecked Deep State? image".png)
Key Takeaways
- Liberal and media narratives that Trump’s federal spending cuts are a “constitutional crisis” are not playing with American voters.
- 68% of those discussing DOGE and halts on federal funding believe the Trump administration is not creating a constitutional crisis.
- Most people believe Democrats are protecting the bureaucratic deep state and enabling rampant spending that undermines American interests.
Our Methodology
Demographics
All Voters
Sample Size
7,000
Geographical Breakdown
National
Time Period
5 Days
MIG Reports leverages EyesOver technology, employing Advanced AI for precise analysis. This ensures unparalleled precision, setting a new standard. Find out more about the unique data pull for this article.
The battle between the Trump administration and liberals—including judges—over federal funding is heating up. Media narratives and Democratic talking points frame the issue as an authority or constitutionality question. The Trump administration and its supporters frame the issue as Washington bureaucrats desperately clawing to maintain their seat on a federal gravy train—at the taxpayer’s expense.
The Trump team, led by Elon Musk and DOGE, is pursuing aggressive cuts to bloated and mismanaged federal agencies like USAID. These efforts are drawing legal challenges, with courts stepping in to block funding freezes and redirections, particularly in areas related to foreign aid, border security, and social programs.
Judicial interventions fuel the ongoing debate over the scope of executive authority. While past administrations exercised discretion over federal spending without comparable legal pushback, Trump’s efforts to audit and reshape government expenditures have been met with swift injunctions and protests and hysterics from Democrats.
I can't stop laughing at this.
— Thomas Hern (@ThomasMHern) February 4, 2025
Chuck Schumer and Maxine Waters holding hands and chanting "We Will Win" after losing everything just 90 days ago.
The Democrat Party is toast. pic.twitter.com/g8cRDwcjrY
The “Constitutional Crisis” Narrative
The Democratic Party and media outlets are framing Trump’s swift and decisive actions on the budget as part of a broader threat to constitutional governance. They claim Trump is defying court rulings, accusing him of authoritarianism. They often compare him to historical strongmen, calling his actions a “constitutional crisis.”
This argument, however, does not stand up to scrutiny. Public sentiment does not support the idea that Trump is dismantling constitutional norms.
MIG Reports data shows:
- 68% of voters disagree that Trump’s actions are creating a constitutional crisis
- 32% accept the premise
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a53a5/a53a5894c8414d669fa4670cea5a04829cbc69ad" alt="".png)
Most Americans see these legal battles as political maneuvers rather than genuine threats to democracy. They say, if there is an actual crisis, it is Democratic resistance to auditing federal agencies. People view the vociferous pushback against executive oversight of agencies as the bureaucratic class fighting to maintain control.
- Sentiment in discussions about USAID is low, dropping to 35% in the last week.
- DOGE discussions are also negative but recovering to 38% on Feb. 11.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cf514/cf5149f2081454f954b61f5a58ef8a79e3ce95a1" alt="".png)
Voters Distrust in Government Spending
Much of the opposition to Trump’s budget cuts stems from what his supporters see as an entrenched system of fiscal waste in a “deep state” which has been unaccountable for decades. Reports of a staggering $3 trillion in government waste since 2004 fuel calls for reform, with voters increasingly angry about how their taxpayer dollars are spent.
The USAID controversy exemplifies this concern.
- 60% of voters believe USAID has surreptitiously funded Hamas, after reports alleging the agency funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into organizations later linked to terrorism.
- 55% believe USAID funding contributed to the COVID-19 pandemic, citing financial ties to gain-of-function research in Wuhan.
- 65% believe the Biden administration enabled waste, fraud, and abuse, prioritizing globalist policies over American interests
Further fueling skepticism is FEMA’s reported $59 million expenditure on luxury hotel accommodations for illegal immigrants. These revelations reinforce anger that government priorities are misaligned with the needs of American taxpayers.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/60f2f/60f2f48bb455f0cc5986ed26f61a672c69c25525" alt="".png)
Judicial Obstruction or Necessary Oversight?
Trump’s efforts to cut federal funding have been met with an aggressive judicial response, sparking debates over the proper role of the courts. Democratic voters largely see judicial interventions as necessary safeguards against executive overreach.
Republican voters view the courts as a political weapon used to obstruct much-needed reforms. They say similar or worse violations happened during the Biden administration and Democrats made no objections and no legal actions.
The broader issue is selective judicial activism. While Trump’s budgetary decisions face immediate legal challenges, many believe Democrats freely exercised funding discretion in the past.
Obama’s executive actions on immigration, for example, went largely unchallenged by the courts, despite sidestepping congressional approval. Biden draws similar criticisms for his actions on differed rent and student loan debt. The disparity in legal scrutiny suggests politicized judges are not acting as impartial arbiters.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/96b46/96b461773017b3a7e8b9c941ac0c073aa3c70a15" alt="".png)
Elon Musk, DOGE, and the Push for Accountability
Perceptions of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) complicate the debate over fiscal accountability. Elon Musk and his team of young tech whiz analysts are drawing attention and criticism. Their role in exposing financial mismanagement across federal agencies is fueling accusations of misused power, unelected influence, and questions of security clearance.
While critics warn of an unelected billionaire influencing government decisions, supporters see Musk’s involvement as a necessary counterweight to entrenched bureaucratic inefficiency.
DOGE’s findings lend credibility to conservative calls for reform. Reports that $50 billion per year is funneled to individuals with no verified Social Security numbers raise alarms over entitlement fraud. This, coupled with revelations that Ukraine war refugees have been placed on American welfare rolls, has further galvanized public opinion against unchecked government spending.