Humphrey School Experts Share Their Perspectives on a Second Trump Administration

December 19, 2024
Wide shot of a panel discussion on the incoming Trump administration
L-R: Professors Ryan Allen, Larry Jacobs, and Michael Minta, along with global policy expert Mary Curtin, were panelists for the December 11 event on the potential impacts of the second Trump administration.

President-elect Donald Trump has called for far-reaching shifts in policies relating to immigration, environmental regulation, foreign policy, civil rights, and many other issues when his second term begins on January 20.

Faculty experts from the Humphrey School of Public Affairs discussed the potential impacts of those policy changes at two December events, sharing their analysis of the most likely outcomes. 

Ryan Allen, associate dean for research and professor of urban and regional planning, noted that the Humphrey School held a similar event in 2016 after Trump was first elected. 

“This time, we come together again in a different political moment, but with the same commitment: to foster thoughtful, nonpartisan dialogue about the civic and policy implications of our election outcomes,” he said. 

“The Humphrey School is uniquely positioned to host these discussions. Our mission—to inspire, educate, and engage leaders for the common good—is rooted in the belief that informed dialogue is the foundation for effective public policy and community resilience. We hope these discussions provide clarity, spark constructive conversations, and help us all think more deeply about the role we can play as individuals and as a collective in navigating the road ahead.”

Here are some key points our experts shared during the panel discussions.   

Panel 2: December 11 

Government restructuring and democratic processes

Larry Jacobs, professor and director, Center for the Study of Politics and Governance: The second Trump administration will have a big impact on policy and the public agenda. 

In the opening months, beginning with inauguration day, it’s going to be “shock and awe.”  Donald Trump has extraordinary skills in setting an agenda, and we’re going to see quite an agenda that will look like the end of American public life as we know it. 

We’re going to see executive orders issued to reduce funding for DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) efforts in universities and other institutions. We’re going to see national emergency declarations as a way to increase energy production, roll back climate change policies, use the military for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, and remove job protections for tens of thousands of federal workers. This is what I mean by shock and awe.  

However, I think over the coming few years we’re going to see a diminishing of Donald Trump’s influence for a number of reasons: the opposition will slow down and obstruct his efforts to try to set the agenda; getting Congress to approve legislation in areas where he can’t rely on executive orders is going to be very difficult because of the Republicans’ narrow majority in the House; and the 2026 midterm elections are right around the corner. And at some point, the fact that he’s essentially a lame-duck president will become more of a factor. 

There’s also a risk of overinflating Donald Trump’s power. He isn’t an all-powerful being; he’s a mortal. And if you look back at his first term, in a lot of ways it was a failure. His legislative productivity outside of the tax cut was pretty limited. 

That fatalism leads to a sense of hopelessness and disengagement. Why protest? Why do the analysis that [students in the audience] are trained to do, when he’s going to win? No! He’s not going to necessarily win. It’s not in the bag. In the coming months and years, I think there’s going to be a very raucous battle and conflict and debate over these public policies, and we all should be part of it no matter your perspective.

Executive action and immigration 

Michael Minta, professor, Department of Political Science: I expect we’ll see much of what we saw in the first Trump administration, but a lot more of it.  

In general, I think we’re going to see more in terms of "identity politics." Most people don’t link that issue with Republicans, but I think you’re going to see more white identity politics. 

The anti-immigrant rhetoric, which used to be considered a far-right position, has become somewhat mainstream. There are still some establishment Republicans who back away from it, but particularly in this cycle, it has become a winning strategy. And unless that strategy is defeated, you will continue to see more policies and actions by Republicans to restrict immigration, in their efforts to win elections.

For example, Donald Trump has said he’s going to issue an executive order to end birthright citizenship (which means anyone born in the U.S. automatically becomes an American citizen). Why would he say something like that? He knows he can’t change that policy on his own, because it’s enshrined in the14th Amendment of the Constitution. And it would create chaos on a number of levels. But to his supporters, it sends a message that he’s doing everything in his power to "make sure our country is safe from undocumented immigrants."

Mass deportations are where the president has more executive power and can have his appointees to the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) carry out his plans. I imagine he will issue orders to round up undocumented people in large numbers.

For quite some time, ICE policy has been that churches, schools, and hospitals were off limits for these kinds of raids. But Donald Trump is considering changing that as well. Can you imagine the fear that people will experience coming to church for services, or to a hospital for medical care, if they think they’ll be apprehended? 

Republicans have really pushed the immigration issue, and I think Donald Trump is going to have to deliver on this. If he does nothing, it’s going to be really difficult for Republicans in the 2026 midterms, where the party of the president usually loses seats anyway.    

Longer term, we should remember that demographics are changing in this country. There’s no doubt it will become a majority-minority country in the next couple of decades, when racial and ethnic minorities will outnumber white people. And those groups tend to vote for Democrats, although Trump made some inroads in the election, particularly with Latino men. In general, those groups tend to lean toward Democrats. The issue is, can the Democrats get these voters to support them? That’s their challenge.  

Foreign policy 

Mary Curtin, retired diplomat-in-residence, Humphrey School, and interim program director, Global Minnesota: Global policy is closely tied with our domestic priorities like immigration and refugees, since many other countries are dealing with rising immigration numbers as well. 

This ties in precisely with the white identity politics that Professor Minta mentioned. In Europe, white identity politics is a driving force in a lot of the right-wing politics that is on the rise across that continent. 

In Donald Trump’s first term, one thing we saw was the way in which unpredictability is a method with him, that chaos is part of his method. For example, I heard a recent discussion about his tariff proposal, and the question was whether it is what he really wants, or whether it’s just part of his negotiating strategy. 

The chaos that he brings is worrisome, and may lead other countries to make decisions that may not be good for the United States.  

His unpredictability is driven by highly personal motivations in his decision making, including narcissism and a desire to make money, that have an impact that is different from a purely ideological approach. The family business is something that we just never have seen before—the way in which his family orbit makes money off of international relations and engages in deals that have international impact.     

All this makes it hard to put a label like "isolationist" to describe Donald Trump’s foreign policy approach; that doesn’t really capture it. He does come out of this deeply conservative tradition, but not in a very traditional way.  He uses the term "America First," not in an isolationist way, but in a "We’ll do whatever we want as I decide" way. 

Presidents throughout history have pretty much been able to do what they want in foreign policy as long as they have the budget to pay for it. But I think we are bound to see this on a scale that we have not seen before. 

And his decisions are not always ideological. If you think back to his first term, he railed against NAFTA, for example, and then in the end he negotiated a follow-on treaty with Mexico and Canada that really wasn’t that different. 

That leads us into Trump’s threats to impose tariffs on goods from several countries, including Mexico and Canada. This is another trend that’s not just in the U.S. A number of countries are raising tariffs to act as fees for access to their economies. But Trump’s bombastic and unilateral pronouncements are on a much different scale. 

Some of the pushback may lead to negotiations of new trade deals, as I mentioned with NAFTA. But the European Union (EU) is very worried about the tariff threat and will retaliate. They know how to manage a good trade fight. It’s their bread and butter. So it could hurt the U.S. economy, it could hurt our trade. Absolutely, there will be retaliation if Trump follows through. 

Watch video of the December 11 event 

Panel 1: December 5

Group photo of Tricia Olsen, Ryan Allen, Christina Ewig and Eric Schwartz
L-R: Professors Tricia Olsen, Ryan Allen, Christina Ewig, and Eric Schwartz were panelists for the December 5 event.  

Immigration and national security

Eric Schwartz, professor of global policy: Immigration policy will be substantially impacted. Donald Trump has said as much in very specific terms. He is channeling and stoking popular sentiment, despite the federal funding that’s been provided to assist immigrants coming into the country. 

His plans may have severe economic consequences in some areas of the country, because certain industries like agriculture and construction employ a large number of immigrants. Minnesota’s economy benefits from immigration as well; we need immigrants to grow jobs here.  

Donald Trump’s plans for large-scale deportations echo other periods of time in U.S. history. He will face obstacles to those plans, including what is likely to be a large number of legal challenges. And some of the home countries of these immigrants may refuse to let them return. 

He may also take aim at programs that allow certain noncitizens to temporarily stay in the U.S. for urgent humanitarian reasons, such as a natural disaster or armed conflict in their home countries. The status of hundreds of thousands of people will be at risk. 

In terms of foreign policy, Donald Trump has little interest in making a sustained commitment of U.S. funding and resources unless the U.S. is being directly threatened. I believe he’ll try to address the Ukraine war in ways not favorable to Ukraine. He may broker a deal with Russia, but I'm not confident that the Russians are done with their aggressions in the region.

Gender equity and women’s rights

Christina Ewig, professor and director, Center on Women, Gender, and Public Policy: Cabinet picks tell us a lot about what the Trump administration will be like. Three of them so far (Matt Gaetz, who withdrew as attorney general nominee; Pete Hegseth, Defense secretary nominee, and Linda McMahon, Education secretary nominee) set the tone—a tone of disregard for women, particularly women’s right to be free of sexual and other forms of violence. 

Reproductive rights have been rolled back in recent years, with Roe v. Wade overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. The results of that decision are already devastating, with a rise in pregnancy-related deaths in Texas and other states with severe restrictions on abortion.

In his first administration, Trump rolled back contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act. Additional restrictions could play out under the new administration, such as: 

  • Instituting the Comstock Act of 1873, which criminalizes the transportation of certain materials through the mail, including contraceptives and abortion-related matter. So mailing abortion medications could be restricted. 

  • The FDA could be pressured to further restrict the use of abortion medication. 

  • Threats to Medicare and Medicaid, which could affect reproductive health more broadly. 

Transgender rights will be restricted. Donald Trump has said he will stop promotion of gender or sex transition at any age. He could exclude transgender people from Title IX protections, which prohibit gender discrimination. 

Under Democratic interpretations of Title IX, trans students have been included under the definition of ‘sex.’ That was reversed under the first Trump administration and is likely to happen again. He has also threatened to cut off federal funding for schools if they don’t adopt a binary definition of gender.  

Human rights and business

Tricia Olsen, professor of global policy: There is more nuance to many of these issues broadly than we may realize. History is more complex, and full of compromise, than many admit. With uncertainty comes opportunity, and hope. We may see unlikely allies working together on some of these issues.

For example, Donald Trump says he wants to increase oil drilling and open up federal land to more exploration. But the U.S. has been the largest producer of oil and gas in the world despite the current restrictions on national lands. The oil industry may not be that interested in increasing production in the U.S. because then that will lower the price of oil. So the demand to relax restrictions may not be there. 

He also has said he wants to terminate the Inflation Reduction Act, which has paid for a great many climate-friendly projects across the country, and end subsidies for electric car production. The vast majority of this funding has gone to red states – EV battery manufacturers, for example. So he may not get support from some GOP members of Congress.  

Businesses are also speaking out about some of Trump’s proposed policies on immigration and tariffs, and warning about how they will increase costs for consumers. 

There is so much happening globally to address climate change and human rights – with or without Donald Trump. Global businesses are preparing to respond to a new law in the European Union, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), which requires companies of a certain size to assess and mitigate the environmental and human rights impacts of their own operations, their subsidiaries and in some cases, those of their business partners.

The takeaway is that it’s a more complicated picture than just rolling everything back. 

Watch video of the December 5 event