Fighting Trump: resistance in the US

The new president of the United States, Donald Trump, did not face huge demonstrations at the start of his second term in January 2025. However, resistance is now growing. Trump’s strategy of “flooding the zone” with executive actions has caused shock and despair, but the breadth of his attacks has also served to unite opposition. His popularity has sharply declined in the first 100 days of his current presidency, reaching historic lows for a US president in recent decades. This article briefly outlines some of Trump’s major attacks, but our focus will be on the developing resistance on the ground.1

Trump’s onslaught

The scale of Trump’s onslaught is shocking, with 141 executive orders passed in 100 days. Unlike the first term, during which some traditional conservatives limited his more extreme impulses, Trump is now assisted and enabled by a well-funded and organised far right. Preparations for his presidency included the 900-page Project 2025 report, many of whose authors are among the loyalists in his cabinet and team of advisors. Some 153 executive actions suggested by Project 2025—relating to 20 government agencies—have already been proposed or completed, 29 percent of the report’s proposals.2

Trump’s attack on aspects of Federal Government, initially through the actions of the ill-defined Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), was described by Project 2025 director Paul Dans as going “way beyond my wildest dreams”.3 Under Elon Musk, DOGE sought to close or gut whole departments, with a loss of over 250,000 federal workers so far. Environmental, regulatory, and civil rights functions were singled out for attack for ideological reasons. The cuts also affected services providing a lifeline to sections of the working class and some services directly useful to US capitalism, such as the broadcaster Voice of America and disease and weather trackers. Although the goal is to help offset tax cuts for the rich worth $4.5 trillion over ten years, these attacks will not end in “efficiency” but will end in chaos.

The image of Musk, the richest person in the world, cutting basic services has mobilised anger among Trump’s critics, with even erstwhile supporters of the president saying the attacks have gone too far. Musk himself had to step back from this role. Opposition may become even more explosive as the Trump Republicans threaten the popular social security, Medicaid and Medicare programmes. 

Although unionisation rates are higher in the public sector than in the private sector, federal workers are barred from striking. This makes them a tempting first victim in a war on organised labour. A March 2025 Office of Personnel Management memo directed 18 departments to terminate their collective bargaining agreements and claimed government workers were barred from unionising. This is currently being fought in the courts.4

Trump has also engaged in vicious scapegoating, aimed at satisfying the base of his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement. Pointing to a fictional “invasion” of criminal immigrant gangs, he is attempting to fulfil his promise of the largest deportation programme in US history. He has not yet surpassed the rate of deportation achieved by his Democratic predecessors Barack Obama and Joe Biden. However, raids and detentions have increased. The rights of trans people have also been used as a wedge issue by Trump, with several repressive executive orders adding to the anti-trans rights bills proposed in individual states. The attacks on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programmes, in the name of a “war on woke”, have gutted civil rights protections. Ironically, Trump still talks of “protecting women” in attacking trans people and uses claims of antisemitism to justify targeting Palestinian activists—and sometimes entire university departments. 

Fears of targeted government action or cuts to federal funding have largely pushed major news organisations, law firms and universities to comply with Trump’s demands. Large corporations have shown a willingness to scrap (already ineffective) inclusion policies. Columbia University had already targeted pro-Palestinian speech under Biden, before fully capitulating to a Trump administration letter dictating security and discipline policy, and even decisions on curriculum. However, there has been outrage and resistance from individuals within these institutions, including growing opposition among the academic rank and file.5 

From small seeds…

Resistance to Trump started small and localised, but it is growing. At least 350 “People’s Marches” took place two days before Trump’s second inauguration. After Trump’s order against gender-affirming care for minors, clinics around the country cancelled appointments for trans youth, with hospital administrators afraid of losing federal funding. After trans communities, staff and their allies—including socialists—mobilised demonstrations in the thousands, these institutions reestablished care.6

Faced with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids, migrants and their supporters flocked to “ICE Watch” and know-your-rights events and trainings, many conducted by unions. By 2 February 2025, 15,000 mostly young Latinx people marched through downtown Los Angeles, blocking the freeway. A day later, protests badged “a day without an immigrant” shuttered shops in many migrant communities. Protests have been joined by students walking out of schools, while community defence groups have sought to disrupt ICE operations.7 Congress members returning home for town hall meetings have been heckled by constituents concerned over civil rights, Musk’s cuts, which included attacks on military veterans’ benefits, and the impact of Trump’s tariffs on farmers. Republicans were warned to cancel such meetings, and Democratic Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer cancelled his public appearances after he, despicably, voted for the Republican budget.  

A “Tesla Takedown” movement has been targeting Musk’s outsized and potentially illegal role in the Trump administration, with hundreds of cities organising protests in front of Tesla dealerships and showrooms. Tesla informed its investors that “changing political sentiment” could hurt demand, pension funds have divested, and declining sales and profits contributed to a loss for Musk of about $182 billion, the largest personal loss of fortune in history.8 He has now been forced to step back from DOGE, claiming he will focus on his ailing company.

Reflecting this broad array of struggles, the Crowd Counting Consortium logged 2,085 protests in February 2025, compared to 937 in February 2017, a month after Trump’s first inauguration.9

Establishment resistance

Much of the opposition by non-governmental organisations (NGOs), universities and unions has been focused on the courts. There have been over 350 lawsuits against Trump’s executive orders. A New York Times analysis in early May found at least 123 court rulings forced pauses to measures introduced by the administration, including the outrageous attempt to deport immigrants under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act.10 Each ruling supporting a hard-won right is welcome, but legal remedies cannot be relied upon. The administration is, for instance, still simply ignoring court orders to return those illegally deported.11

Unlike Columbia and many other universities—and pushed by students and the American Association of University Professors—Harvard was the first university to reject Trump’s demand for federal oversight, despite the threatened loss of $400 million in federal funding. However, we should have few illusions in a university that has capitulated on many issues and has been especially craven in defending Israel.12 

Similarly, the Democratic Party whose failures and betrayals helped prepare the ground for Trump is hardly a reliable opposition force. Democratic strategist James Carvell has advised the party to avoid “politically charged positions” in defence of DEI and to “roll over and play dead”, waiting for “Republicans to crumble beneath their own weight”. Worse still, many Democratic officials echo Trump’s hateful views on immigration or trans people.

Bernie Sanders’ Fighting Oligarchy tour

Independent senator Bernie Sanders, joined by the left-wing Democrat and House Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has been more effective in catching the mood with his Fighting Oligarchy tour. Huge crowds have assembled to hear their condemnation of Trump and billionaires. The tens of thousands turning out at many events demonstrate the size of the opposition, even in states won by the Republicans. 

This mobilisation of class anger is positive. However, what Sanders promises is running for office—leaving most with no way to get involved except to vote. He urges would-be candidates to run as independents or progressive Democrats, against corporate Democrats or Republicans, but refuses to call for building a new party, rooted in working-class struggle and resistance, that could weaken the hold of the two-party system. Sanders’s sharp criticism of the Democrats has in the past been followed by him ultimately backing their nominees, leading to confusion and demoralisation among his supporters. This is the case even though Democratic Party leaders have repeatedly shown they would rather have the likes of Trump in office than Sanders.

Ocasio-Cortez, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), is now firmly rooted in the Democratic Party, endorsing Biden and Kamala Harris, voting to break a potential rail strike, and backing down on Zionism. If the tour positions her as Sanders’s successor, the result will be to help channel opposition to Trump and the effects of capitalism back into the Democratic Party, which has long been the graveyard of social movements. 

In the tour, there are other limitations apparent. The focus is not just on electoralism but also on economic populism. This downplays factors such as US support for genocide in Gaza. Worse still, Sanders recently claimed in an interview he agreed with Trump on “making sure our borders are stronger”, adding, “nobody thinks illegal immigration is appropriate”.13 This is the opposite of building struggles against racism and deportations. Despite these limitations, it has been possible for those with a different approach to intervene in these rallies. For instance, on 12 April 2025 in Los Angeles, socialist activists gave out flyers to the 36,000-strong crowd, bringing some of those in attendance to a rally for migrant rights which took place afterwards.

A swelling movement

In the context of the growing discontent, the call from a new online group—“50501”—for protests in all 50 state capitals on 17 February 2025, Presidents’ Day, also hit a nerve. The call was picked up and amplified by the Democratic-leaning organisations Indivisible and Move On. Turnout ranged from under 50 in Mississippi to 10,000 in New York City. Protesters held handmade anti-Trump and anti-Musk signs, while many others waved US flags, reflecting some of the contradictions present within the movement. 

By 5 April, the crowds attending a series of “Hands Off” protests had grown. The organisers estimate that three to five million took part across 1,400 locations. The establishment politics of the main forces behind the protests were shown by the distribution of “Hands Off NATO” placards—there were no “Hands off Gaza” ones. Nonetheless, pro-Palestinian protesters showed up, and handmade placards addressed this and a range of other issues.

In Washington DC, a labour feeder-march began at the AFL-CIO building and union leaders spoke alongside left-facing Democrats.14 Carl Rosen, president of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, notes that the 5 April rallies were composed of “basically anyone who was disgusted with Trump for whatever reason” and that it was “the more activist portion of the Democratic Party that was there primarily”. He argues that, despite some union mobilisation, the protests were not yet a sign of a concerted working-class struggle: “They weren’t necessarily organised around class issues—although obviously the objectionable things that the Trump administration is doing are attacks on the working class”.15 

Nonetheless, it would be wrong to dismiss the protests as made up only of liberals. Any genuine movement against Trump will inevitably involve Democratic voters, through it should certainly not be led by Democrat politics. Rather than abstaining, socialists need to intervene in efforts to build and shape more effective struggles out of these broad mobilisations. 

Further coordinated protests took place two weeks after “Hands Off”, including in New York City, where an event celebrated both Earth Day and migrant rights. This brought out similar numbers as on 5 April, but the crowd was younger, with more people of colour and more radical chants. On 17 April, a National Day of Action to Defend Higher Education, called by unions, including the American Association of University Professors and student activists, saw rallies and teach-ins on numerous campuses.

In March, pro-Palestinian protests have also been reinvigorated by the abduction and attempted deportation of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist at Columbia University. This struggle has drawn together activists over Palestine and immigrant rights, as well as a wider layer of people frightened by the erosion of civil liberties.16 Detained for similar reasons, Rumeysa Öztürk and Mohsem Mahdawi have now been released from custody after protests.

The role of unions

Labour organisations remain a key potential element of the resistance. Unions have organised several protests, such as the Save our Services rallies organised by federal unions on 19 February 2025 or the hundreds of protests by the American Postal Workers Union on 20 March and the National Association of Letter Carriers on 23 March. School staff in the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) and those in Service Employees International Union (SEIU) in Los Angeles have turned away ICE agents looking for migrant students. Ten unions issued a statement against “Trump’s campaign of terror” on migrant and workers’ rights, which was signed by many other organisations and locals.17

In response to Trump and DOGE’s attacks on federal jobs, there has been a surge in membership for the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) union. A cross-union rank-and-file initiative, the Federal Unionists Network (FUN), also helped connect angry workers who sought to push their unions into activity. While AFGE filed lawsuits, FUN organised a series of near-daily pop-up rallies in front of federal buildings in the early weeks of the attacks. A FUN Zoom event on bottom-up organising was reported by Labor Notes to have drawn 65,000 views.18 This has still not translated into strike action among federal workers in defiance of the law.

Union participation began to move beyond a token presence within wider protests on May Day. In March, the CTU convened a 200-strong national meeting of trade unionists, along with community groups concerned with issues such as migrant and racial justice, to coordinate regional actions on 1 May. The goal was to construct networks and coalitions that would continue to organise through to 1 May 2028, a date on which United Auto Workers (UAW) international president, Shawn Fain, has called for a “general strike”. Most of the speakers at the March meeting, including Fain, argued that the Democrats would not protect workers and that, instead, class solidarity was necessary.

It is no coincidence that the CTU, a local of the American Federation of Teachers, has put itself at the heart of this process. In 2010, the militant rank-and-file caucus CORE, which has socialists at its centre, won leadership of the union. Since then, the CTU has organised several important strikes, and forged community coalitions through its “social justice unionism” approach.19 In the leadup to May Day, the CTU held weekly calls, produced outreach materials decrying the “billionaire takeover”, and launched a website for cities and towns across the country to list their May Day events and download resources.20 Over 2,000 activists, representing all 50 states, attended these calls. Rosen, who was among the attendees, argues: “These mass calls—none of that was ever done before. What CTU did here was brilliant… It shows what you can do when you elect really good leadership in even just one local…that has class consciousness, that has a certain level of fearlessness, willingness to lead by example”.21

More than 1,000 rallies and events were held across the country on 1 May. These were often able to knit together different issues of oppression and exploitation. For instance, in Baltimore feeder marches—including ones for Palestine, education, families and children, migrant justice, and labour—began at different parts of the city and converged at a plaza at the busiest intersection of the city. In New York City, at least 10,000 marched—with major union contingents joining forces with climate, Palestine, migrant groups and the socialist left, along with unaffiliated anti-Trump individuals, for New York’s largest May Day since at least the Occupy protests in 2012.22

The Philadelphia May Day rally ended with a Sanders’ speech, but the real culmination involved hundreds of hotel, food service and casino workers, members of Unite Here Local 274, marching to the freeway, where they blocked traffic for half an hour, until cleared by the police, which arrested 70. “We’re tired of our prices going up,” said Shafeek Anderson, a hotel worker and member of the union, “We’re tired of the inequality in life and everything else”.23 

Unions whose members already have some experience of strikes also took radical action. For instance, in California, AFSCME 3299, which represents over 37,000 University of California workers and had already been involved in a series of actions, held a two-day strike starting on 1 May 2025, with pickets at all ten campuses. Their colleagues in another union, UPTE-CWA local 9119, joined the strike. Their numbers swelled the May Day rallies in Los Angeles and other cities in California.

Hundreds of National Nurses United members in a New Orleans hospital had already struck during negotiations—and made a point of doing so again on May Day. At Lockheed Martin in Orlando, Florida, and Denver, Colorado, 900 UAW workers also walked out on strike the same day, after a 99.3 percent vote. Many non-striking members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers at the Orlando site walked out in sympathy. 

The May Day protests have also given rise to a “Workers over Billionaires” campaign, centred on the US South.24 The May Day coalition of unions, immigrant rights groups and other organisations with roots in working class communities has the potential to spark a serious struggle if it is not swallowed up by the union bureaucracy.

What’s next?

Fain’s “general strike” call was based on unions aligning their contract expirations for 1 May 2028—as most US unions have a no-strike clause for the duration of their contract.

CTU has already done so, matching UAW’s auto contracts at the Big Three auto firms. Members of the United Federation of Teachers passed a resolution calling for others to do the same. A mass, coordinated strike would be important, helping to demonstrate working-class power and potentially cutting through divisions within the class. However, workers cannot afford to wait for three years to build organised workers’ resistance to Trump, and, indeed, any increase in struggle today will help, not hinder, whatever plans are made for May 2028.

The next presidential election is set to be held in 2028, so a strike that year would also come under tremendous pressure not to threaten votes for the Democrats. It could easily follow many previous union mobilisations designed to lead people to the ballot box, rather than into the streets. Rank and file involvement in ongoing organising and action is crucial in building the confidence and combativity of workers, which cannot be conjured up simply through a call from above for a general strike in three years.25 Immigrant workers (unionised or not) can also be mobilised, bringing back the idea of political strike, as happened in the 2006 Chicago and Los Angeles “Day Without an Immigrant” demonstrations that fought off a previous administration’s attempts to persecute migrants.26 

Trump’s administration has already caused great pain and fear, but there are cracks visible in the coalition of right-wing forces he heads. He is not unstoppable. The economic impact of tariffs and cuts to social services could further erode Trump’s support. He will likely ramp up the racism and cruelty towards imagined enemies in response. This is another reason why a strategy of focusing on the economy and avoiding divisive “woke” issues, adopted by the Democratic Party establishment and echoed by Sanders is a disaster.27 Encouraging workers to take up questions of oppression is essential in unifying the resistance from below and preventing elements of the working class from identifying with their rulers.

A broad working-class opposition is needed to fight the current attacks now—and will be required to fight any potential future Democratic administration. To win fundamental change, we need a socialist voice pointing to revolutionary anti-capitalist strategies. This cannot be summoned at will but must be built through relating to and seeking to build and shape the emerging struggles and class battles. 

Virginia Rodino is the Executive Director of the Coalition of Labor Union Women, AFL-CIO; president of the Maryland chapter of the Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance, AFL-CIO; and a member of the Communications Workers of America, Washington-Baltimore News Guild Local 32035. She is a Marx21 member in Baltimore, Maryland. Eric Fretz is a socialist activist living in Brooklyn, New York.

Notes