Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives aren’t fading away. They’ve become ingrained in various institutions, systems, and funding models. Even if the terminology shifts, the core ideology persists.
During his second term, President Donald Trump took significant action by issuing a executive order that mandated the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division to eliminate illegal DEI programs. This move pressured organizations reliant on DEI and a so-called “victim-centered” ideology.
Democrats are already repeating narratives about indoctrination. Should they secure wins in the midterm elections, some may aim to transform this into impeachment or legal confrontations.
In response, these organizations are mobilizing. They’re filing lawsuits and rallying supporters to protect their funding. Complicating matters, a federal court has instructed the government to continue financial support for certain groups during ongoing litigation. Essentially, taxpayers continue to fund groups that oppose the president and his policies.
The Office of Civil Rights seems poised to interpret this new set of guidelines as DEI under prosecutorial authority.
A “victim-centered approach” is now influencing federal prosecutions. Despite the presence of law enforcement officers, these methods are rooted in the same power dynamics that have been central to DEI initiatives across various sectors. They swap out factual evidence for subjective feelings of harm and present ideological views as objective expertise.
Since 1999, around 12,000 judges in America have undergone training in this mindset. The curriculum focuses on trauma theory and concepts like “power and control,” utilizing frameworks adapted from activist social work disguised as forensic science.
Judges who complete this training tend to describe themselves as “trauma-informed,” signaling belonging to a newer generation who claim to better understand victim experiences—even when some individuals assert they were not victimized at all.
This indicates a bias rooted in ideology rather than legal merit. And this has been funded by the federal government for two and a half decades.
A prominent advocate of these ideas is Freedom Network USA, an organization that trains law enforcement officials and certifies victim advocates nationwide. The group is contesting the Trump administration’s executive order, stating it restricts essential services for human trafficking survivors by limiting the language used in training materials.
Americans are already experiencing the presence of DEI in educational settings. Questions about public safety and the aviation industry’s competence have emerged due to DEI employment initiatives. The concept of a victim-centered approach feels like DEI is donning a badge and taking a seat on the bench.
This complex machinery is being wielded against communities deemed dangerous or irrational. The left has explicitly categorized MAGA as a cult, with Trump as its figurehead.
How is this known? Because they’ve said so.
Representative Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who holds a key position on the House Judiciary Committee, stated he sought advice from cult experts to communicate with his Republican counterparts. Hillary Clinton mentioned that MAGA supporters might require “formal deprogramming of cult members.”
These comments aren’t just offhand; they foreshadow future actions.
Freedom Network USA serves as one facet of a broader network of federally funded NGOs that train law enforcement and create curricula. These entities are not merely observers of these principles. They form the underlying infrastructure. The same political coalition labeling MAGA as a cult has constructed legal tools to enact those beliefs and is now suing the government to ensure the flow of funds continues.
The unfolding consequences of this victim-centered approach are already visible in judicial settings. The government has noted input from “cult expert” Stephen Hassan, who has reportedly contributed to legal theories regarding “cult of Trump.” A monitoring project highlighted Trump’s request to remove Raskin and Hassan from Congress.
Real victims of egregious crimes deserve respect and consideration within the justice system. This is indisputable. However, this principle may actually weaken judicial fairness by diminishing protections for all involved parties.
A victim-centered approach is the scenario if the left regains power. Conservatives may be framed either as manipulators or the duped.
Cassidy Hutchinson’s memoir recounts her tenure as a White House staffer, suggesting that loyalty to Trump becomes a requirement, implying that personal commitment is proof of a lack of freedom to disengage. Under a victim-centered framework, what once was merely a critique of society could morph into criminal precedent, thus forming a prosecutorial argument.
Democrats are reiterating this narrative about indoctrination. If they succeed in the midterms, many will likely attempt to transform it into a legal crusade or impeachment scenario. Hence, serious debate must be prioritized.
They’ve laid bare their views on MAGA. They see a network of cults and subcultures led by various figures, all seemingly indoctrinating their followers to rally behind Trump.
They plan to harness this influence and victim-centered perspective to orchestrate a scandal of indoctrination against Trump and his supporters.
How do we know? Because they’ve stated it plainly.
