What a relief to see a president who actually uses the power the Constitution gives him to protect American lives, jobs, and sovereignty. In his first year back in the Oval Office, President Trump tore up the cautious, timid playbook of Washington consensus and moved boldly — deploying federal assets, ordering sweeping immigration actions, and slapping tariffs on rivals that have long taken advantage of our country. Whether you cheer or curse the man, you cannot honestly say he has been timid about defending the American people.
One of the most visible changes has been the federalization of security in cities where local leaders refused to enforce the rule of law, with National Guard units and federal forces sent to restore order and protect federal personnel. That move drew predictable howls from coastal elites and immediate legal challenges, including a federal judge’s order that the administration end a California deployment he ruled exceeded authority. Conservatives should not be naive about lawfare, but neither should we applaud political leaders who cede entire neighborhoods to lawlessness.
Washington itself saw a stunning assertion of federal control when the administration invoked rarely used provisions to assume temporary authority over D.C. policing amid claims of rising crime and disorder. Critics insist the statistics did not match the rhetoric, and civil libertarians rightly asked hard questions about liberty and local control. Still, the instinct to act when federal interests and citizens are threatened reflects a presidential spine that too many recent occupants of the office lacked.
On immigration the administration moved with the speed and ruthlessness its opponents call “draconian” and patriotic Americans call decisive enforcement. Programs like Operation Safeguard and widened use of expedited removal have led to sharply higher detention and deportation figures as ICE carries out interior enforcement against criminals and those ordered removed. Human Rights Watch and other watchdogs have criticized conditions and tactics, and those concerns deserve oversight — but the core question remains: who is accountable for protecting American communities and stopping the flow of illegal drugs and criminals?
The trade front has been equally revolutionary, with the administration using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and related authorities to impose hefty tariffs on major trading partners that long enjoyed unfettered access to U.S. consumers. From hefty levies on Canadian and Mexican goods to additional duties on Chinese products, these moves cracked open the cozy global trading order that enriched foreign exporters while hollowing out American factories. The short-term price pain is real, but after decades of losing manufacturing and strategic leverage, reclaiming bargaining power was necessary and overdue.
Unsurprisingly, the courts and opposition governors have pushed back, producing injunctions and furious headlines about overreach. That is how our system is supposed to work: vigorous executive action met with vigorous judicial review — and robust political debate. Conservatives should welcome constitutional checks on power, but we should not fall for the argument that inaction and appeasement are virtue; strength under law is what keeps our families safe and our economy free.
Republicans who once whispered about restoring order are finally seeing what it looks like in practice: an administration willing to use every tool to prioritize Americans first. Yes, the style is blunt and the headlines are chaotic, but after years of being lectured by elites and international institutions, many Americans prefer a leader who acts rather than apologizes. If conservatism means anything today, it should mean defending citizen security, national sovereignty, and the dignity of work — even if that requires forcing reluctant institutions and foreign partners to change.
The questions ahead are painful and practical: will the law ultimately rein in overreach, will trade pressure yield fairer deals, and can deportation and detention be managed humanely while enforcing the rule of law? Patriots should demand accountability on those fronts while standing behind a presidency that refused to let the status quo keep hollowing out our country. The last year proved that bold executive action can change real outcomes for real Americans, and conservatives should seize the opportunity to shape those changes toward liberty and prosperity.
