The 2025 Supreme Court term ended last week with several landmark decisions that will shape, reshape and continue to affect our politics, our culture, and the health of our society.

After his re-election in 2024, the Trump team promised to overwhelm the opposition with a torrent of activity they likened to a firehose, and they followed through on that promise. The 2nd Trump Administration issued a record number of Executive Orders in its first few weeks, many of which were aimed at diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, and followed up in its second year with a barrage of relentless pursuit of immigrants. Some of these efforts have succeeded while others have not. The goal was not just to win, but to exhaust the opposition. It takes time, energy and resources to bring lawsuits to challenge unconstitutional actions, in addition to organizing through ordinary political channels and institutions to fight back.

Even in losing, the Trump administration has weakened or undermined our democratic culture and institutions. It has dissolved long standing norms, not just violated the law. For example, the administration is attempting to shield federal prosecutors from state bar associations' ethical misconduct rules, even as it has been found to deceive grand juries. It has also targeted many of our most vulnerable people, moving the country toward an ethnic and white nationalist vision, fundamentally shrinking the “we.”

At the heart of these activities is the simple question: “Who Belongs?” The administration’s answer, too often, is a blood and soil vision of heritage. At the center of this was an executive order Trump issued on January 20, 2025, entitled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.” The order attempted to strip citizenship from roughly one million people, and was immediately challenged in court. On June 30, the Supreme Court rejected this effort in the landmark decision of Trump v. Barbara. Six Supreme Court Justices held that federal law grants citizenship to all persons born in the United States, with a few minor exceptions, such as the children of ambassadors. This decision affirms the principle of birthright citizenship, and a more than 120-year-old precedent, in the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). But it is disturbing that at least three Justices would reject this principle, which is at the heart of the core protections of the 14th Amendment.

Read the full article about people power by John A. Powell at Othering and Belonging Institute.