When Stephen Miller, former senior policy adviser to Donald J. Trump, started pushing the idea of deploying the Insurrection Act for domestic policing, a new front opened for a coalition of white nationalist groups and Republican operatives. In a parallel move, Jeffrey Clark, senior fellow at the Center for Renewing America, has been quietly drafting legal justifications to weaponize that same law. The linchpin of their strategy is Project 2025, a 920‑page policy blueprint released by the Heritage Foundation in April 2023. The document, officially titled “Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise,” aims to reshape the federal government around an extreme Christian nationalist vision, centralizing presidential power and dismantling civil‑rights protections that have existed since the 1950s.
Why Project 2025 Matters Now
At its core, the blueprint contains a provision on page 557 that would wipe out every Department of Justice consent decree—court‑ordered agreements that force police departments with documented patterns of misconduct to reform. Donald B. Ayer, who served as deputy attorney general under President George H. W. Bush, warned that the plan is “designed to let Donald Trump function as a dictator, by completely eviscerating many of the restraints built into our system.” With the November 5, 2024 election looming, proponents see the blueprint as a ready‑made playbook should the former president secure a second term.
From Charlottesville to Texas: The Road to ‘Total War’
The Southern Poverty Law Center’s Hatewatch division traces a straight line from the 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, through the “Stop the Steal” movement after the 2020 election, to today’s overt calls for a cultural war. Recent reports note an 80 percent surge in hate‑crime filings since Trump announced his 2015 campaign.
In Texas, the True Texas Project—originally a North Texas tea‑party group—has partnered with state Attorney General Ken Paxton and U.S. Senator Ted Cruz. Their June 2024 conference framed multicultural policies as a “global plot” designed to erode Christianity, while openly courting Christian‑nationalist rhetoric. One session downplayed the antisemitic roots of the Great Replacement Theory, featuring speaker Wade Miller, who claimed he supports Israel while denying the theory’s inherent hatred.
Legal Mechanics: The Insurrection Act and Consent Decrees
Both Miller and Clark have floated the same legal lever: the Insurrection Act of 1807, a 19th‑century statute that lets the president deploy troops to quell domestic unrest. While the Heritage Foundation denies that Project 2025 directly calls for a military takeover, the document does acknowledge “the possibility of using the law to secure the southern border.” The removal of consent decrees would effectively strip courts of the power to monitor police departments with historic ties to white supremacist groups—historical examples include Klan members embedded in local forces during the civil‑rights era.
Impact on Law Enforcement and the Military
Investigations have uncovered “a significant number of police instructors” with links to right‑wing militias, many of which are illegal under federal law. The Department of Defense’s own data suggests that diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs boost unit readiness, yet Project 2025 contributors portray DEI as a threat to military supremacy. As Russell Vought, director of the Center for Renewing America, put it, “we are working to keep legal and defense communities from preventing use of the Insurrection Act.”
What This Means for Voters and Civil Rights
If enacted, the blueprint would give the executive branch unprecedented leeway to curtail voting rights, deregulate immigration, and overhaul education policy—all under the banner of “presidential leadership.” Civil‑rights advocates warn that such a shift would create “an America where hate could thrive and with little consequence.” The stakes are highest in swing states where the GOP’s alliance with extremist factions could tilt local elections, especially if consent decrees that monitor police conduct are gone.
Looking Ahead: Election 2024 and Beyond
Both mainstream Republicans and fringe white nationalist groups are betting on a Trump victory to activate Project 2025’s provisions. Legal scholars anticipate a flurry of lawsuits if any attempt is made to rescind consent decrees or invoke the Insurrection Act. Meanwhile, watchdog groups plan to intensify monitoring of fundraising streams that funnel money from conservative think tanks into grassroots activist networks.
Frequently Asked Questions
How could Project 2025 change policing in the United States?
The blueprint proposes scrapping all DOJ consent decrees, which currently force departments with patterns of civil‑rights violations to implement reforms under court supervision. Without these agreements, local police could operate with fewer federal checks, potentially allowing officers with extremist ties to remain on the force.
What role does the Insurrection Act play in the plan?
Both Stephen Miller and Jeffrey Clark have suggested the Act could be used to deploy troops for domestic law‑enforcement purposes, effectively expanding presidential power to suppress protests or secure borders without congressional approval.
Which Republican officials are linked to the True Texas Project?
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and U.S. Senator Ted Cruz have spoken at or endorsed events hosted by the True Texas Project, signaling a direct connection between state leadership and the group’s Christian‑nationalist agenda.
What evidence ties police instructors to extremist groups?
Investigations cited by the SPLC show that dozens of police training officers have documented affiliations with right‑wing militias or white‑supremacist organizations, some of which are classified as illegal domestic terrorist groups.
Why do civil‑rights groups view Project 2025 as a threat?
The plan’s push to dismantle civil‑rights protections, expand executive authority, and legitimize extremist rhetoric could erode decades‑long gains in voting rights, police accountability, and anti‑discrimination law, potentially reshaping the nation’s democratic foundations.
