America’s two-party system is seeing one of its largest divides in American history. Belonging to one party or the other can be an immediate reason for hatred of another, and both parties are becoming increasingly critical of each other, especially within the government. Our affective polarization problem is causing a rift between the public, but under a more sinister context, allowing Trump to bolster his political platform that targets immigrants and criticizers of his movement and administration.

What exactly is affective polarization? Why does it matter?

Affective polarization, as explained by scholars Iyengar and Krupenkin, describes the animosity and distrust, primarily based on differences in identity, that occurs between different groups of people. It distinguishes itself from the other type of polarization also identified by Iyengar and Krupenkin, that being ideological or political polarization which is a divide based on disagreements on policies, values, and other factors that affect one’s own politics. 

In America, affective polarization has led to a huge gap in understanding and misconceptions about where much of one’s party’s individuals align with policy preferences. Kleinfield, another political scientist, argues that much of affective polarization stems from this huge gap in understanding that leads people to believe that there are higher rates of ideological polarization, despite similarities being more common than expected. 

In the media especially, anyone can see the high tensions between different parties that berate each other and politicians are able to capitalize on the affective polarization to move their agenda forward. Much of this affective polarization in the U.S. occurs because of differences in matters like poverty or immigration, which Trump based much of his political campaign depicting as a high safety concern.

How Trump is using affective polarization to amplify his platform and break democratic norms

Trump plays into the working-class, white nationalist narrative that captivates much of his audience who share discontent for the government that left them behind and neglected the economic crisis facing much of Trump’s supporters today. Trump paints immigrants as an exact threat to this version of America, and is able to use this narrative to suppress protests, increase surveillance of Americans, and use excessive force against people who hold identities or beliefs that threaten the MAGA “Make America Great Again” narrative.

Since Trump’s first presidency, his administration has used ethnic tensions to create an intense, passionate supporter base and justify breaking democratic norms. Much of Trump’s supporter base has become attached to the white nationalist, exclusionary sentiment that Trump has spewed. In 2016, Trump referred to Mexican immigrants as “criminals, drug dealers, rapists”, shaping the racist associations between immigrants, Mexicans, and crime in the MAGA base. In an uploaded White House presidential action message from earlier this year, Trump’s administration added onto their discriminatory rhetoric by claiming that immigrants “have abused the generosity of the American people, and their presence in the United States has cost taxpayers billions of dollars at the Federal, State, and local levels.”

Simultaneously, Trump and other Republicans have staunchly opposed and mocked the Democratic Party for pushing diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives they claim limit freedom and go against America’s founding principles like the principle that “all men are created equal.” As a result, Trump and ideologically similar politicians are able to deepen the divide between the white working class America that cherishes the founding narrative of the nation and traditional values, and more progressive Americans with new values and visions for American society.

However, in 2023, immigrants paid $96.7 billion dollars in federal, state, and local taxes according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. Additionally, Abramitzky et al.’s study on the incarceration gap between immigrants and the U.S. born claims that immigrants commit crimes at similar, if not lower rates than U.S. born citizens. The statistics disprove Trump’s evidence for his arguments condemning immigrants, and his base is being penetrated by divisive and poor arguments.

Through claims depicting immigrants as contributors to the economic crisis and dangerous criminals, the Trump administration is able to successfully justify the use of federal forces like the National Guard and others to execute mass arrests and deportations of both documented and undocumented immigrants, to his supporter base. As a result, however, Trump has faced much pushback from the public and criticism which has led to other democratic rule breaking to suppress opposition and avoid accountability.

How do federal agencies play a role in Trump’s MAGA narrative?

Throughout the past few months, Trump has made several successful and unsuccessful attempts at deploying the National Guard in several American cities like Portland, Los Angeles, and Memphis. For many of these cities, Trump sent the National Guard in response to anti ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) protests which are largely peaceful with a few breakouts of violence. This raises concerns around First Amendment right violations as deploying the National Guard against protestors reveals Trump’s willingness to use force to threaten groups or individuals opposing his presidency.

Simultaneously, ICE’s and the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) lack of transparency and new contracts with technology companies raise concerns about information collected, kept, and stored. As the arrests of immigrants ramp up, a journalist at 404 Media, Jason Koebler, noted that in a recent class action lawsuit against the DHS revealed that footage from an immigrant detention center requested for the case had been “destroyed”. The case aimed to hold the Department of Homeland Security accountable for the forced starvation, unsanitary conditions, and other human rights violations present at immigrant detention centers. The Department continued on to say that gaining footage from the detention centers would be difficult, making it harder to provide the crucial evidence that would be incriminating and provide avenues for legal and horizontal accountability. 

With new contracts between ICE and companies like Paragon Solutions, threats to privacy and opposing movements are strengthened. Paragon Solutions would provide ICE with spyware technology that hacks into phones with the goal of gaining more information on organizers, opposing political movements, and the other people behind it. The work would be done without warrants, which would violate the Fourth Amendment surrounding unreasonable searches and seizures. It would be yet another way to crack down on protestors and inflict punishment on them through methods that invade their privacy and punish political diversity.

Other threats to vertical accountability include the use of excessive force and assault on American civilians and journalists by ICE agents. Several videos have circulated online about ICE agents yelling and aggressively pushing journalists out of an elevator, causing the hospitalization of one journalist. In other videos, American civilians are pushed to the ground, even when not displaying any signs of resistance and arrested unconstitutionally without warrants.

Is there hope for the status of American democracy?

Yes. While the Trump administration has presented strong threats to political opposition and human safety, institutional resistance under America’s judicial system provides a beacon of hope. Despite Trump’s attempts to deploy the National Guard and make actions that consolidate power into the federal government, city courts like those of Portland and Oregon have struck down Trump’s moves to send the National Guard into their states. 

Cities and states suing the administration for sending out the National Guard has been key to continuing efforts of resistance and opposition to an authoritarian regime. The courts have provided constitutional balancing, a key factor and tool discussed by scholars Gamboa, Garcia-Hogaldo, and Gonzalez-Ocantos in checking executive power within Latin America. Similarly, with American courts, scholars can see how constitutional balancing provides the U.S. with a chance at keeping a democracy stable even under a regime testing its stability.  

Courts provide a temporary, but necessary and important roadblock in a country’s path to authoritarianism. Their resistance must, however, be paired with other measures such as strong civilian coalitions formed to fight authoritarian actions and values. Politicians and the American public must also consider strengthening and reforming opposing parties to avoid replicating the same party system situation that allowed an authoritarian regime to come to power. The inability of the Democratic Party to understand and appeal to America’s white working class and similar sectors of American society contributed to the rise of Trump and MAGA. As a result, it will take major understanding of the white working class and similar sectors by the Democratic Party and other opposition to destabilize Trump’s regime. 

Institutional resistance alone will not maintain American democracy. The U.S. requires its people to mobilize behind opposing parties and to reshape their goals to fit the shifting needs of all Americans to gain back the trust of their people, restabilize American democracy, and limit avenues for more democratic backsliding in the future.

Bibliography

Davis, Carl, Marco Guzman, Emma Sifre. Tax Payments by Undocumented Immigrants. Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, 2024. https://itep.org/undocumented-immigrants-taxes-2024/ 

Dou, Eva. “ICE amps up its surveillance powers, targeting immigrants and antifa.” The Washington Post, October 17, 2025. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/10/17/ice-surveillance-immigrants-antifa/ 

Gamboa, Laura, Benjamin García‐Holgado, and Ezequiel González‐Ocantos. 2024. Courts Against Backsliding: Lessons from Latin America. Law & Policy

Iyengar, Shanto, and Masha Krupenkin. 2018. “The Strengthening of Partisan Affect.” Political Psychology 39 (S1): 201-218.

Kleinfeld, Rachel.  Polarization, Democracy, and Political Violence in the United States:  What the Research Says.  Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.  Available at https://carnegieendowment.org/files/Kleinfeld_Polarization_final_3.pdf 

Koebler, Jason. “Two Weeks of Surveillance Footage From ICE Detention Center ‘Irretrievably Destroyed’.” 404 Media, November 18, 2025. https://www.404media.co/two-weeks-of-surveillance-footage-from-ice-detention-center-irretrievably-destroyed/ 

Ley, Ana, and Wesley Parnell. “Journalist Injured in Chaotic Scene at New York Immigration Court.” The New York Times, September 30, 2025. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/30/nyregion/journalist-injured-immigration-courthouse.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare 

Shah, Naureen. “Trump is Abusing His Power to Build a Dangerous, National Policing Force.” American Civil Liberties Union, October 3, 2025. https://www.aclu.org/news/immigrants-rights/trump-is-abusing-his-power-to-build-a-dangerous-national-policing-force 

The White House. “Protecting the American People Against Invasion.” Presidential Actions. January 20, 2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/protecting-the-american-people-against-invasion/   

Witz, Billy. “What to Know About Trump’s Federal Crackdown, City by City.” The New York Times, November 18, 2025. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/18/us/trump-immigration-raids.html   

Abramitzky, Ran, Leah Boustan, Elisa Jácome, Santiago Pérez, and Juan David Torres. 2024. “Law-Abiding Immigrants: The Incarceration Gap between Immigrants and the US-Born, 1870–2020.” American Economic Review: Insights 6 (4): 453–71.