The end of MAGA's dominance: "The American people see the Democrats take down Trump themselves"

President Trump is a juggernaut. His shock and awe campaign against American democracy, the rule of law, civil society, the Constitution, and the norms and institutions has been extremely successful. Trump's mastery of spectacle and mass media and his natural showmanship and charisma — in combination with the dark arts of politics and power that he learned from his mentor Roy Cohn — make him a formidable foe. The difficulty in trying to stop Trump and his MAGA movement is amplified by how the world is in the throes of an authoritarian populist era that is fueled by rage at 'the system' and 'the elites' and the existing order of things. In total, Trump and his MAGA movement are the product of much larger problems and disruptions both here in the United States and abroad that defy a simple solution.
What about the Democrats and the larger so-called resistance? They have been mostly ineffective — to the degree they have even been active and present. Since Trump has returned to power, the Democrats, for example, have decided that waiting for Trump and his MAGA Republicans to overextend themselves and for the American people to realize that they are victims of the Big (and little) Con is a viable strategy. Applying military strategy to the realm of 'normal' politics, Trump is continuing his shock and awe campaign, and the Democrats are trading space for time.
Focusing in on Trump's speech to Congress last week, the Washington Post describes the efficacy and result of this plan by the Democrats as:
The Democrats showed last week that presidential addresses to Congress are no place to formulate a resistance. Almost everything they did during President Donald Trump's appearance highlighted weakness rather than strength. They had not one strategy but several. The sum was less than the parts.
Many Democrats came away worried that their party is even weaker than it appeared after Trump's victory in November, and for now, Democrats might be left to hope that Trump and the Republicans will make enough mistakes to offer them a way back. But that is only one part of a comeback strategy if Democrats are to become broadly competitive.
The Democrats were handcuffed from the start Tuesday night as they sought to project the right amount of opposition. Too boisterous and unruly in their disagreements and they would embarrass themselves, playing into Trump's hands and highlighting their powerlessness. Too passive and they would further anger their demoralized base that is looking for a spark of life from the leadership of the party. They were passive, yes, while trying to project mild resistance.
Winning by default and counting on one's enemy to self-sabotage is not a viable strategy in an existential struggle. Such a strategy is also not very compelling for a public that is increasingly alienated, tired, afraid and mired in learned helplessness, as they see Trump and his MAGA movement and American fascism's domination as inevitable and soon to be the new norm instead of as forces and outcomes that are contingent and still very much in doubt.
In an attempt to make better sense of the Democratic Party's weak and passive approach to political battle in the Age of Trump and their ongoing failures of strategy and messaging — and potential ways to correct them and find victory — I recently spoke with M. Stephen Fish, a professor of political science at the University of California, Berkeley. His new book is 'Comeback: Routing Trumpism, Reclaiming the Nation, and Restoring Democracy's Edge.'
This is the first part of a two-part conversation.
How are you feeling? Trump has been back in the White House for eight weeks. His shock and awe campaign has been very effective. What are you doing to balance yourself and maintain some perspective — assuming you have been able to?
His shock-and-awe campaign has been theatrical, but I'm neither shocked nor awed. Trump isn't doing anything he didn't promise to do, and his opening round has been more of a shit-show of bluster and flip-flops than an irresistible offensive. The key to remaining balanced is to focus on the fight and to give as good as we get. Trump's high-dominance style has carried him this far, but he also has many weaknesses — if Democrats finally start to push their advantage.
If Trump really follows through on everything he's initiated since January 20, the economy will tank, veterans will quit receiving their benefits on time, American kids will be crippled by polio and dropping dead from measles, and America will become a contemptible international pariah and wholly-owned Kremlin subsidiary. And if Trump backs down, he'll look weak. Either way, I'm sure you'll agree the Democrats will have a lot to work with. But no matter how bad things get, none of it will stick to Trump unless the Democrats make it stick. Otherwise, Trump will continue to smash through every disaster and maintain his hold on the political arena.
What are your thoughts on ? Carville said the Democrats should 'roll over and play dead' and 'allow the Republicans to crumble beneath their own weight and make the American people miss us.' That does not seem like a winning strategy in an existential struggle for America's democracy.
Carville is typically a fighter, and I know he isn't proposing passivity as a long-term strategy. But, his New York Times piece does basically call for the same losing tactics the Democrats have been pursuing for years: Stand back, cede the narrative and headlines to Trump, and then wait for everybody to realize just how awful he is and rush to support the Democrats. That's largely the way Biden ran his reelection campaign until he stepped aside; in fact, he explicitly said that he intended to make the election a referendum on Trump. Here we had a president who had been in power for almost four years and had racked up impressive accomplishments, including producing a roaring economy, but rather than make it about the Democrats' triumphs, he chose to make it about Trump. That approach displayed timidity, pessimism, defeatism, and lack of self-confidence, which is why Trump was clobbering Biden in the polls even prior to voters realizing the extent of Biden's weakness during his debate with Trump. Then, when Harris first stepped out as the party's nominee-presumptive after Biden's withdrawal, she offered a much higher-dominance act, but she then reverted to a low-dominance, let's-make-it-about-Trump approach.
During the 2024 campaign, you and I had a series of conversations here at Salon and elsewhere. You also had an opinion essay in the New York Times warning that Trump is a high-dominance leader and that he had a high chance of winning if the Democrats did not adjust. They didn't listen to you — or me or the others who were publicly warning about Trump's popularity. Harris launched her campaign with a high-dominance performance but then faltered soon after her great debate with Trump. History will likely look back at that pivot as one that crystallized the Democratic Party's failings and imminent defeat.
Absolutely. As you'll recall, between the time Harris took over as the Democrats' candidate in mid-July and the debate on September 10, she was a boss. She called attention to herself and her own great plans, projected exuberance, and limited her Trump-time to telling the truth about how horrible he is and not fit to be president. Armed with that approach, she electrified Democrats, put Trump on the defensive, and took the lead in the polls. But then her campaign reverted to ceding the spotlight to Trump, making the campaign a referendum on him and calling on everyone to be horrified by his appalling behavior.
The moment her campaign switched gears, which happened shortly after Harris shellacked Trump in the debate, you could hear the air hissing out of the tires and watch Trump get his momentum back. And as it turned out, all the groups the Democrats strove to stir to wounded umbrage weren't much moved, and they weren't impressed by the Democrats' constantly being overcome by the vapors. The partisan gender gap between 2020 and 2024 actually shrunk, with Harris proportionally losing more women than men compared to Biden's performance in 2020. And Trump made enormous strides with Hispanics and smaller but still substantial gains among Blacks and Asian Americans.
How much more evidence do the Democrats need that letting Trump be Trump and then hoping to pick up the pieces when he falters doesn't work? Trump acts, and the Democrats stand back and wait for him to stumble. But Trump's bungling has never been enough to bring voters over to us in sufficient numbers to stop him and rout Trumpism. Until the American people see the Democrats take down Trump themselves, he's going to seem like a boss.
Trump and his MAGA movement are winning, and quite easily. They know that storytelling and showmanship are the keys to winning and advancing their agenda. Why are Trump and his propagandists so good at this? Why are the Democrats so bad at it?
Democratic operatives still seem to think that Jack and Diane Sixpack sit down to the kitchen table shortly before the election and calculate which candidate stands closer to them on 'the issues,' offers them more stuff, and 'cares about people like them.' But there's no evidence that anything of the sort actually takes place, and you can't make a compelling story out of 'the issues,' promises to add a dental option to Obamacare and patronizing reflections on how much people are hurting. It's especially ludicrous to focus on voters' purported despair rather than your own great exploits and plans while your own party is in power, which was the case in 2016 and 2024.
While Biden was still running, he did finally try to step out late in the campaign and claim credit for the roaring economy, but he was far too impaired by then to offer a forceful, resonant message. Beyond that, he was shut down by fretful Democratic party operatives and politicians who told him: How can you talk about 'Bidenomics' when polls say so many people aren't 'feeling the benefits'?!
When Harris first stepped out as the nominee, she was all jauntiness and humor/quick wit/cheek, but she then sank back into the party's old habits. When asked whether people were better off than they were four years ago, Harris refused to answer. Why? Because polling showed that many people weren't happy with the economy. When asked about immigration, she consistently intoned: 'Our immigration system is broken.' No doubt that line played well in the Democrats' focus groups. Never mind that her party had been in power for almost four years; the people were supposedly struggling to make ends meet and the immigration system was broken. Under her and Biden. And when asked how her policies would differ from Biden's, she said she couldn't think of anything. Why? We can't be sure, but by some accounts, she was afraid of offending Biden. This is what poll-driven, fear-based, irrationally risk-averse messaging looks like. It thrills no one. It changes no minds. It leaves your opponent's story as the one everybody hears.
Donald Trump's story is basically: When I'm in power, you will enjoy the greatest economy in the history of the world. When the Democrats are in power the economy is horrible. Trump and his propagandists and other surrogates and messengers fill in his story with all kinds of facts and figures, many of which are not true, just pulled out of the ether. But Donald Trump does have a story, and it does convince a lot of people. Trump tries to shape public opinion rather than just respond to it. What would a more compelling message from Harris have sounded like?
Kamala Harris could have said something like this: You're goddamn right we're better off than four years ago! Back then, unemployment was 15 percent; under me and Biden, it's lower than it's been since the 1960s. COVID pushed inflation up, but Biden and I hammered inflation down to 2 percent — exactly where the Fed says it should be. Our economy is leaving other rich countries in the dust; it's growing faster than all of them. America is the innovation capital of the world. Real wages have been growing for a year-and-a-half running. New business start-ups and corporate profits are surging. Every time I check the numbers, the Dow is setting records. When Trump left office, the Dow was 31,000; today it's 42,000. Dream on, Mr. Trump! Fast growth, plunging inflation, rock-bottom unemployment — economists said it couldn't be done. Oh, and by the way, the budget deficit is half of what Trump left us with four years ago.
This is what Democrats do: We come in and clean up the messes made by our Republican predecessors. Roosevelt did it after Herbert Hoover. Clinton did it after the first Bush, Obama did it after the second one, and Biden did it after Trump.
But you ain't seen nothin' yet. Under me, we're going to make Biden's good economy even better. Way better. No more kids in poverty in the richest, greatest country on Earth. Watch for the Dow to break 50,000. Why the hell not?
Today's Democrats do not have a brand or compelling identity, and they are horrible political salespeople. Trump's recent address to Congress is an example of Trump as the master of spectacle. For his audience it was perfect. Those outside of TrumpWorld and the MAGAverse thought his speech was a failure.
Nothing surprising there. Trump's speech was grand theater. Vintage Trump, complete with all the props: The ranting about the Democrats' supposed perfidies, the proclamation of a new Golden Age and the adoring families of the victims of violence perpetrated by undocumented migrants.
The Democrats' responses, unfortunately, were also largely predictable, and altogether pathetic: Rep. Al Green getting thrown out for standing and waving his cane at Trump; the pink dresses (I still don't get what that was supposed to mean); and the indignant flashing of the ping-pong paddles with their various messages. Then there was the flurry of Democratic responses on talk shows over the following several days. On Stephen Colbert's show, Pete Buttigieg tore into Trump for not dwelling on people's economic pain and for failing to lower egg prices.
But most abject of all was the Democrats' formal response to Trump's speech, delivered by the new senator from Michigan, Elissa Slotkin. American democracy is being dismantled by fascists and Trump is trashing a world order that has ensured American preeminence and prosperity for the past 80 years. Putin is very pleased. What did Slotkin have to say? 'The Middle Class is the engine of our country…Michigan literally invented the Middle Class!… We need to bring down the price of things we spend the most money on: Groceries. Housing. Healthcare. Your car.' Of course, she hit on other points as well, but never did she offer anything other than the bromides the Democrats have been mouthing for as long as anybody can remember. Nowhere was there the slightest sense of urgency, alarm, anger, or fight. I'm sure Slotkin is a wonderful person, but it's also noteworthy that she won her Senate race by 0.3 percent in a state where Gov. Gretchen Whitmer whipped her MAGA opponent by 11 points. Rather than turn to the harder-edged Whitmer — or, for that matter, Rep. Jasmine Crockett, Rep. Eric Swalwell, Senator Ruben Gallego, Senator Adam Schiff, or Gov. Josh Shapiro — to let loose on Trump, the Democrats chose Slotkin to make her heartfelt pitch for — what else? — the put-upon middle class.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

USA Today

20 minutes ago

• USA Today

I'm exhausted by attempts to pretend discrimination doesn't exist in America

Mary-Frances Winters defined the term 'Black fatigue' in her book of the same name, describing it as a form of psychological and emotional exhaustion from persistent racism and microaggressions. You know what I'm tired of? The MAGA movement twisting and co-opting language used to help Americans cope with racism and turning it back on them. The latest example is "Black fatigue." In 2020, author Mary-Frances Winters defined the term in her book of the same name, describing it as a form of psychological and emotional exhaustion from persistent racism and microaggressions. This fatigue can impact one's mental and spiritual well-being, and if left unaddressed, it could also affect physical health and shorten life expectancy. Today, the term has been co-opted by the right – and even people unwittingly using it against themselves. For instance, when five girls attack a woman at the opening night of the Milwaukee Night Market, it is labeled "Black fatigue." When some boys drive recklessly in a stolen car, it is also called "Black fatigue." When a 39-year-old man is arrested in the shooting of a Milwaukee police officer, you guessed it. I reached out to Winters, 74, who said she was not surprised to learn the MAGA crowd had co-opted the term. However, she is disheartened that some are using it against their fellow African Americans. Opinion: I remember my first Juneteenth. It's more than a Black holiday. While it's understandable for people to feel frustrated and speak out when they witness something bad happen, it's important to recognize that no single group has a monopoly on bad behavior. The bigger question is why do Black people often find themselves under greater scrutiny? I believe we know the answer to that. Real 'Black fatigue' gives voice to microaggressions, systemic racism This disparity is precisely why Winters coined the term in the first place, capturing the struggles faced by the Black community in a world that is quick to pass judgment. Ironically, the movement co-opting the term is the one inflicting the pain by pretending bigotry doesn't exist by President Donald Trump's attempt to erase diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Opinion: Trump worries more about South Africa's nonexistent genocide than real US racism When Winters' book was released, America was grappling with a global pandemic and confronting systemic racism after the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin, who sparked nationwide protests. When she was writing the book, many expressed to Winters, the founder and CEO of The Winters Group, Inc., a 40-year-old global organization development and DEI consulting firm, that they felt exhausted by microaggressions, conveying a sense of pressure to excel at work but thought they were only making minimal progress. Think of it as constantly walking on a new carpet. Over time, you don't realize how the fibers are worn down until you compare before-and-after pictures and see how your repeated steps have diminished the carpet's beauty. That's what racism does. Since Trump took office again, Winters noted that real Black fatigue has intensified due to his rhetoric and policies, which have escalated racial tensions and eroded civil rights protections, further compounding a long history of unacknowledged, unaddressed racism and discrimination. 'He's hurting people. Just think about all the government jobs that have been eliminated," Winters said. "A lot of those employees were Black men and women who now must figure out what they want to do." MAGA uses concept to perpetuate negative, racist stereotypes There are dozens of videos online featuring people discussing the co-opted concept of Black fatigue, and to be honest, it makes me angry. It's not surprising, though, as there are even more videos and websites seemingly dedicated to showcasing the worst behaviors. Sites like and 'Ghetto Fights' often highlight instances of fighting, or just being unkind to each other. Given that our country is so hypersegregated, it's no wonder that people watch these clips and conclude this is representative. And the thing that is so tiring is how the term has been twisted so silently. Dynasty Ceasar, a local community activist who has studied race and racism, was unaware that the definition had changed. She described the issue as 'complex and sensitive,' making it difficult to grasp. 'We need to be mindful of the impact of such statements and avoid language that reinforces negative stereotypes or internalizes racism,' Ceasar said. It's important to clarify that I'm not suggesting that Black people should avoid accountability for their negative actions. What I mean is that everyone, regardless of their race, should be held accountable for their actions but should not be subjected to a different standard than anyone else. It's easy to fall into the trap and use the term incorrectly When I spoke to Winters, I had to be entirely transparent and shared with her that I had inadvertently fallen into the trap. I shared an incident I witnessed while shopping at Plato's Closet, a resale shop in Greenfield. I was about to buy some shoes when I noticed an elderly White woman with her grandson. She was purchasing a pair of sunglasses for him, and I let them skip ahead of me in line because her grandson was very antsy. While we were waiting, a Black woman was selling some shoes and seemed unhappy with what was being offered to her. When the cashier called for the next customer, the older woman accidentally bumped into her, which sparked a verbal altercation. The Black woman began cursing, expressing her frustration about people who bump into her without saying "excuse me." Although the older woman apologized, it only seemed to escalate the situation, as the woman continued to curse and insult her. After both women left the store, several employees asked what had just happened, and I felt compelled to explain the situation. After the incident, I called my cousin and mentioned that I had experienced "Black fatigue" because I felt that the woman's behavior was out of line. My cousin told me that I was misusing the term. Winters and Ceasar both agreed that racism is rarely the result of a single action; it is much more complex than that. While they did not condone the actions of the woman for shouting, Ceasar acknowledged that her outburst might have stemmed from the many times she had been ignored, overlooked as if she did not exist, or made to feel devalued. If Black fatigue can negatively impact on a person's mind, body and spirit, it can also lead to diminished emotional well-being, sometimes manifesting as outbursts to seek acknowledgment. If you find yourself using the term to express disappointment about something bad happening in the world, take a moment to consider how you express that. If your feelings are not specifically related to race, then your fatigue may not be about racial issues at all. It might be about human nature. However, if you believe that only Black people are capable of negative actions and continue to use the term in that context, it might be necessary to reflect on your own biases. That's what I'm tired of. James E. Causey is an Ideas Lab reporter at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, where this column originally appeared. Reach him at jcausey@jrnhttps:// or follow him on X: @jecausey

USA Today

20 minutes ago

• USA Today

Trump Mobile, gender care and the champion Panthers: The week in review

Floods ravage Texas, Appalachians Torrential rain and flash flooding in Texas and parts of West Virginia trapped drivers, swept vehicles away and pulled homes off their foundations, leaving as many as 20 people dead and communities struggling to recover. Thunderstorms over San Antonio dropped nearly 10 inches of rain in a matter of hours, more that double the amount of rain the area typically gets in all of June. Up to 4 inches drenched the Appalachian region, overwhelming creeks and waterways. 'It happened so quickly,' said Lou Vargo, Ohio County's emergency management director. "I've been doing this for 35 years. … I've never seen anything like this.' Court upholds gender care ban The U.S. Supreme Court dealt a blow to the transgender rights movement and a victory to the Trump administration when it upheld a Tennessee law barring gender-affirming care for minors. The ruling fell along ideological lines as the court's six conservative justices ruled in favor of the ban and the three liberals dissented. Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said the decision was a victory 'in defense of America's children'; Kimberly Inez McGuire, head of Unite for Reproductive & Gender Equity, said the court chose 'cruelty over care.' Trump Mobile answers the call Yet another enterprise is getting the Trump name. Trump Mobile, a new cellular service, will offer the 5G '47 Plan' for $47.45 a month (Donald Trump is the nation's 47th and 45th president) and its own phone, the T1 Phone, the Trump Organization announced. 'Trump Mobile is going to change the game,' said Donald Trump Jr., who runs the president's conglomerate with his brother Eric. The gold-colored phone will retail for $499. Of course that's not the only venture in the Trump orbit: There's Truth Social and the crypto company World Liberty Financial, plus Trump Bibles, watches, sneakers and guitars. Steve Carell's advice to grads: 'Just dance' When Steve Carell is your commencement speaker, you should be ready for anything. The actor, who was presented with an honorary degree from Northwestern University before he spoke to its graduates, briefly turned the ceremony into a dance party as he bolted off the stage and into the crowd of delighted grads to 'That's Not My Name' by The Ting Tings. 'That was as invigorating as it was disturbing,' he told them afterward. His speech was not without some sage advice: 'Remember to laugh when you have the opportunity and to cry when necessary,' he said. And, 'just dance sometimes.' Twice is nice for the Florida Panthers Who said the Sunshine State is no place for hockey? The Florida Panthers netted their second straight Stanley Cup − and denied the Edmonton Oilers a second straight time − with a 5-1 romp in front of the home crowd in Game 6 behind a record-tying four goals from winger Sam Reinhart. The Cats join their brethren the Tampa Bay Lightning, who won back-to-back Cups in 2020 and 2021. As for Edmonton, falling short again was especially stinging: The last Canadian team to take home the Stanley Cup was the Montreal Canadiens in 1993. − Compiled and written by Robert Abitbol, USA TODAY copy chief

Miami Herald

27 minutes ago

• Miami Herald

Europe's growing fear: How Trump might use US tech dominance against it

LONDON -- When President Donald Trump issued an executive order in February against the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court for investigating Israel for war crimes, Microsoft was suddenly thrust into the middle of a geopolitical fight. For years, Microsoft had supplied the court -- which is based in The Hague in the Netherlands and investigates and prosecutes human rights breaches, genocides and other crimes of international concern -- with digital services such as email. Trump's order abruptly threw that relationship into disarray by barring U.S. companies from providing services to the prosecutor, Karim Khan. Soon after, Microsoft, which is based in Redmond, Washington, helped turn off Khan's ICC email account, freezing him out of communications with colleagues just a few months after the court had issued an arrest warrant for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel for his country's actions in the Gaza Strip. Microsoft's swift compliance with Trump's order, reported earlier by The Associated Press, shocked policymakers across Europe. It was a wake-up call for a problem far bigger than just one email account, stoking fears that the Trump administration would leverage America's tech dominance to penalize opponents, even in allied countries like the Netherlands. 'The ICC showed this can happen,' said Bart Groothuis, a former head of cybersecurity for the Dutch Ministry of Defense who is now a member of the European Parliament. 'It's not just fantasy.' Groothuis once supported U.S. tech firms but has done a '180-degree flip-flop,' he said. 'We have to take steps as Europe to do more for our sovereignty.' Some at the ICC are now using Proton, a Swiss company that provides encrypted email services, three people with knowledge of the communications said. Microsoft said the decision to suspend Khan's email had been made in consultation with the ICC. The company said it had since enacted policy changes that had been in the works before the episode to protect customers in similar geopolitical situations in the future. When the Trump administration sanctioned four additional ICC judges this month, their email accounts were not suspended, the company said. Brad Smith, Microsoft's president, said concerns raised by the ICC episode were a 'symptom' of a larger erosion of trust between the United States and Europe. 'The ICC issue added fuel to a fire that was already burning,' he said. Khan has been on leave from the ICC since last month, pending a sexual misconduct investigation. He has denied the allegations. An ICC spokesperson said it was taking steps to 'mitigate risks which may affect the court's personnel' and 'taking extensive measures to ensure the continuity of all relevant operations and services in the face of sanctions.' The episode has set off alarms across Europe about how dependent European governments, businesses and citizens are on U.S. tech companies like Microsoft for essential digital infrastructure -- and how hard it will be to disentangle themselves. Concerns about how else Trump might leverage technology for political advantage has jump-started efforts across the region to develop alternatives. Casper Klynge, a former Danish and European Union diplomat who worked for Microsoft, said the episode was in many ways the 'smoking gun that many Europeans had been looking for.' 'If the U.S. administration goes after certain organizations, countries or individuals, the fear is American companies are obligated to comply,' said Klynge, who now works for a cybersecurity company. 'It's had a profound impact.' The tech debate adds to an increasingly fractious U.S.-European relationship over trade, tariffs and the war in Ukraine. Trump and Vice President JD Vance have criticized how Europe regulates U.S. tech companies, and U.S. officials have made digital oversight and taxation part of ongoing trade negotiations. European regulators have argued that they need to be able to police the biggest digital platforms in their own countries without worrying that they will face political pressure and punishment from a foreign government. 'If we don't build adequate capacity within Europe, then we won't be able to make political choices anymore,' said Alexandra Geese, a member of the European Parliament. Since Edward Snowden's leak of scores of documents in 2013 detailing widespread U.S. surveillance of digital communications, Europeans have sought to diminish their reliance on U.S. tech. Lawmakers and regulators have targeted Apple, Meta, Google and others for anticompetitive business practices, privacy-invading services, and the spread of disinformation and other divisive content. Yet without viable alternatives, institutions across the region have turned to U.S. digital services. Amazon, Google, Microsoft and other U.S. firms control more than 70% of the cloud computing market in Europe, which is the essential way for storing files, retrieving data and running other programs, according to Synergy Research Group. The ICC has been a longtime customer of Microsoft, which provides the court with services including the Office software suite and software for evidence analysis and file storage, according to an ICC lawyer who declined to be identified discussing internal procedures. Microsoft has also provided cybersecurity software to help the court withstand digital attacks from adversaries like Russia, which is being investigated for war crimes in Ukraine. In February, after Trump issued penalties against Khan, Microsoft met with ICC officials to decide how to respond. They concluded that Microsoft's broader work for the court could continue but that Khan's email should be suspended. He switched his correspondence to another email account, said a person who has communicated with him. Sara Elizabeth Dill, a lawyer who specializes in sanctions compliance, said the Trump administration was increasingly using sanctions and executive orders to target international institutions, universities and other organizations, forcing companies to make hard choices about how to comply. 'This is a quagmire and places these corporations in a very difficult position,' she said. How tech companies with global services respond is especially important, she added, 'as the broad repercussions are what people and organizations are primarily worried about.' Microsoft and other U.S. companies have sought to reassure European customers. On Monday, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella visited the Netherlands and announced new 'sovereign solutions' for European institutions, including legal and data security protections for 'a time of geopolitical volatility.' Amazon and Google have also announced policies aimed at European customers. Still, many institutions are exploring alternatives. In the Netherlands, the 'subject of digital autonomy and sovereignty has the full attention of the central government,' Eddie van Marum, the state secretary of digitalization in the Ministry of Interior Affairs, said in a statement. The country is working with European providers on new solutions, he said. In Denmark, the digital ministry is testing alternatives to Microsoft Office. In Germany, the northern state of Schleswig-Holstein is also taking steps to cut its use of Microsoft. In the European Union, officials have announced plans to spend billions of euros on new artificial intelligence data centers and cloud computing infrastructure that rely less on U.S. companies. Groothuis, the Dutch member of the European Parliament, said lawmakers in Brussels were discussing policy changes that would encourage governments to favor buying tech services from EU-based companies. 'The situation is not tenable, and we see a big push from European governments to become more independent and more resilient,' said Andy Yen, CEO of Proton. European tech companies see an opportunity to win customers from their U.S. rivals. Cloud service providers like Intermax Group, based in the Netherlands, and Exoscale, based in Switzerland, said they had seen a jump in new business. 'A few years ago, everyone was saying, 'They're our trusted partners,'' Ludo Baauw, Intermax's CEO, said of U.S. tech companies. 'There's been a radical change.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Copyright 2025