On March 17th, the Swedish-based Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute released its 2026 annual Democracy Report titled “Unraveling the Democratic Era?” with an aptly themed cover image: a tattered, threadbare American flag with the acronym “S.O.S.” spray-painted across its stripes. “The speed with which American democracy is currently dismantled is unprecedented in modern history,” the report writes. Within a year of the second Trump Administration, executive aggrandizement has severely weakened checks and balances and displayed astonishing disregard for the rule of law. No longer is the United States a pillar of liberal democracy – rather, for the first time in fifty years, it is slipping towards a democratic grey zone.

V-Dem currently places the U.S. as an electoral democracy, still retaining free and fair elections, but it has lost its liberal components: strong checks and balances, individual protections from “tyranny of the majority,” and constraints on government overreach. This year’s report comes at a critical juncture for electoral democracy in America – current legislation in Congress and a case pending within the U.S. Supreme Court threaten to rapidly undermine this status as we gear up for the 2026 midterm elections. What is happening within our institutions now must be viewed in tandem with V-Dem’s assessment to understand how we have lost our liberal democracy and are presently at risk of capitulating further.

One Year of Trump 2.0

There is no doubt surrounding the central role the second Trump Administration has occupied in weakening the U.S.’s democratic institutions. We have witnessed a flurry of executive orders within his first one hundred days to reshape the federal government according to his political vision, the deployment of our National Guard to cities across the country to quell protests against his immigration policies, the sanctioning of International Criminal Court judges and staff, the unprecedented budgetary bolstering of the Department of Homeland Security and its agencies (namely Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE]), the bombing of numerous foreign countries and extrajudicial attacks on boats in the Caribbean, the introduction of restrictive press rules for the Pentagon, the deportation of international students for speech against the administration’s views, the longest government shutdown in American history—the list unfortunately does not cease. These actions are the result of a largely unchecked executive, with both chambers of Congress playing the party line, a combination that has made for a drastic dismantling of checks and balances.

To put the severity of these matters into perspective, “[f]or Orbán in Hungary, it took about four years, for Vučić in Serbia, it took eight years, and for Erdoğan in Turkey and Modi in India, it took about 10 years to accomplish the suppression of democratic institutions that Trump has achieved in only one year,” V-Dem founder Staffan Lindberg said in a March 17th interview, referring to V-Dem’s assessment that Trump 2.0 is the “most rapid ‘executive aggrandizement’ in modern history.”

It is critical to note that Trump 2.0 has built upon the autocratic playbook of other countries’ illiberal democracies. Indeed, scholars have drawn attention to these connections into both of his administrations. Recent literary volumes by political academics cover in-depth both instances of illiberalism in American history and global case studies of autocratic success to raise flags around America’s democratic trajectory. As liberal democracy has eroded, the next step in such playbook is to target democratic processes.

The United States is presently barreling towards another critical election that will determine the final two years of Trump 2.0’s actions: the 2026 midterms. Every member of the 435-member House of Representatives will face reelection, with thirteen seats judged to be a toss-up. In the Senate, only a third of the 100-member upper chamber will face reelection for thirty-five total – the two extras being from special elections due to presidential appointments (Ohio with JD Vance, and Florida with Marco Rubio). Three seats are judged to be a toss-up with an additional four slightly leaning right or left. In both the House and Senate, Republicans presently hold a very slim majority (218-214 and 53-48, respectively) and risk one or both flipping to a Democratic majority in this year’s November elections. If this were to happen, Trump will face an enormous hurdle for his agenda’s funding and legislation.

The 2026 midterms will test the limits of America’s electoral democracy for this reason, especially as V-Dem considers erosion of clean elections a declining indicator. However, Trump and congressional Republicans have long already launched an attempt to subvert voting rights for millions of Americans.

The SAVE Act

In American federal elections, individual state laws – under standards set at the federal level – largely determine how they are handled, meaning a level of checks and balances is implemented for national elections. Under this balance, states are responsible for maintaining voter rolls and validating registration based on residence (in my scenario, I temporarily reside in Ohio but am registered to vote in all Pennsylvania elections, including presidential, under my permanent residence), including validating citizenship (an existing requirement to vote). Each state varies on its level of requirements for registration, with some mandating a form of photo identification and others only requiring your address and a social security number (see here, Pennsylvania’s form).

First introduced by Texas Republican Chip Roy in the House in January 2025, the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility” (SAVE) Act is a conceited effort to change voter registration laws across the United States. In summary, its main provisions require “documentary proof” of citizenship, meaning typically either a passport, naturalization certificate, or birth certificate to register to vote. How this disenfranchises eligible voters derives from the fact that not every American has access to these documents, nor do they guarantee security for individuals who have changed their name, including for marriage. According to the Bipartisan Policy Center, as of 2026, “52% of registered voters do not have an unexpired passport with their current legal name.” Additionally, “11% of registered voters do not have access to their birth certificate.” The bill also does not clarify the process of verification for mail-in voters or those who register online, resulting in further complications to an already complex process undertaken by local and state government officials. Together, these provisions alone stand to create complications for millions of registered voters, thereby preventing free and fair elections in a last-ditch attempt to subvert citizens’ right to vote and maintain party control of Congress.

On March 16th, debate finally began in the Senate on Trump’s SAVE Act after it had been narrowly approved in the House in April 2025. Described as a “marathon debate,” it is expected to last multiple days and will allow both parties to have ample floor time as amendments are introduced and voted upon. Should it pass the Senate, Trump, who had described it as a top policy priority, is certain to sign it into law. The SAVE Act becoming law would be a blow to America’s election integrity, sinking the country further towards V-Dem’s democratic grey zone. This is not the only moment in election integrity to monitor, however, as another federal branch considers a closely related question.

Birthright Citizenship

In June 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court was expected to issue a landmark decision on Trump’s executive order redefining citizenship. However, it instead focused on the procedural matters of the case rather than the actual legality of his act. In the following months, a new case arose considering the same question, and this term the Court accepted the petition on its merits. The order, which declared that “individuals born in the United States are not U.S. citizens at birth if their parents lack sufficient legal status,” attempts to interpret the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause to fit this narrative.

Like clean elections, V-Dem considers judicial independence one of the core pillars of liberal democracy and, as it was downgraded, the United States’ judiciary finds itself in one of its most tumultuous moments in modern history. Just this previous term, the Court exhibited a startling obsequiousness to the executive branch, such as expanding presidential immunity and allowing for the virtual shuttering of the Department of Education. Additionally, it paused many of the lower courts’ injunctions against Trump’s policies, allowing them to remain in effect – notable examples include cutting research grants, deporting individuals to third countries, and permitting federal immigration officers to racially profile individuals in their enforcement duties. The Court has also weakened its own branch’s authority, ironically enough, with the case meant to consider birthright citizenship last term. In that decision, the Supreme Court ruled that lower federal courts could not issue nationwide injunctions, decided after a wave of district courts did as much to stall executive orders’ implementations as their merits were considered and a final decision was rendered.

Presently, the Court is scheduled to hear arguments on the issue of birthright citizenship on April 1st. Dozens of interest groups have already filed amici curiae supporting both petitioner and respondent. It is difficult to predict the Court’s direction as, despite maintaining a 6-3 conservative majority and having greatly emboldened the executive branch, there have been significant instances of repudiating Trump’s actions (such as the recent tariffs decision).

Like the SAVE Act, its timing will have immense influence on the future of elections in America and will create a legal nightmare that will lead to the disenfranchisement of millions of American citizens.

It is clear through the administration’s present priorities that liberal democracy in the United States has indeed vanished and that electoral democracy, exposed and vulnerable as it is, faces its most significant hurdles not even two years into Trump’s four-year term.