The federal government isn’t America’s only authoritarian institution, as the backlash at Yale to its negotiations with the Trump administration reveals. Jan-Werner Müller, a Guardian US columnist and Princeton professor, argues that the battle over Yale’s response shines a light on the danger of smaller authoritarian structures within civil society.
Yale Faculty, Students, and Alumni Mobilize Against Settlement
As news spread of Yale’s leadership negotiating a deal with the Trump administration, the university’s faculty, students, and alumni sprang into action to oppose any settlement. The exact intentions of the president and lawyers remain unclear. In the case of Harvard, Trumpists—including Trump himself—may have leaked about imminent concessions to pressure the university. What is clear is that the Trump administration has launched a wide-ranging investigation of Yale, accusing it of discriminating against white and Asian students.
Civil Society’s Authoritarian Underbelly
Many believed the US possessed a robust civil society that could counterbalance an overbearing government and resist authoritarian encroachments. However, Müller notes that few reckoned with institutions themselves being run in a fairly authoritarian fashion—universities being a prime example. This has deleterious consequences for democracy as a whole.
The argument for civil society’s freedom-preserving role dates back to Alexis de Tocqueville, who praised Americans for associating to defend common interests. Yet, as political scientist Sheri Berman argued in the 1990s, civil society is not by definition pro-democratic. The Weimar Republic had a vibrant civil society, but its members were committed anti-democrats. Similarly, today’s US includes hate groups like the Proud Boys and the Patriot Front.
Authoritarian Structures Within Democratic Organizations
Even if members support democracy, the structure of an organization itself can be authoritarian, as law professor Genevieve Lakier points out. Managerial types may avoid all-out battles with an aspiring authoritarian government. Jurists Daniel J Hemel and David Pozen note in In Search of University Democracy that US tertiary education often gives ultimate authority to politicians or powerful trustees, with genuine shared governance rare—students especially have little say.
This model may justify presidents ensuring long-term institutional flourishing, but it has led many civil society and business leaders to cave during Trump 2.0. Examples include law firms that conceded and FIFA toning down anti-racism messaging in the US. Individuals objecting to concessions often have no influence and can only resign in protest.
Anticipatory Obedience and Its Consequences
This wave of anticipatory obedience is egregious because non-leaders might sometimes know better. The Trump administration may not honor its own deals, and some deals give the justice department continuous control over an institution. Even if a university thinks it got off lightly, effects on applicants, faculty, and alumni could be negative. Notably, Yale Law School—not known for progressive resistance—opposes any settlement, especially as universities fighting back have been vindicated in courts.
Reconstruction and the Need for Democratic Institutions
Disillusionment with civil society should not lead to defeatism. Where elite actors have failed, ordinary people have stepped up, as in Minneapolis. Not every institution must conform to representative democracy, but as we think about post-Trump reconstruction, one question should be high: do so many civil society institutions need to be as authoritarian as they currently are?
