Who will stop Trump and Elon Musk from dismantling the US government?

To paraphrase Ernest Hemingway, there are two ways to descend into autocracy: gradually and then suddenly. Right now, we are on the bullet train.

With President Trump in office only a month, many say his “shock and awe” campaign — issuing executive orders to abolish birthright citizenship, defund national health, invade sensitive Treasury Department payment systems, shutter USAID, impound funds allocated by Congress, fire civil servants and the like — puts us well on the road to autocracy. And the presence of his satrap, billionaire Elon Musk, makes even Republicans nervous and underscores the anxiety over where we are headed.

The Democrats are stunned, wringing their hands. They have no agenda except to say they say they don’t like what Trump is doing. And a few may believe that what he is doing is not so bad.

True, there are some 40 lawsuits filed nationwide — some sound, and others untenable — seeking to block this junking of American government. But sorting it all out will take time, while Trump argues in the courts that he is a unitary executive with extraordinary powers to ignore acts of Congress and trash the Constitution by executive fiat. His vice president suggests he can defy court orders anyway — a sure passport to tyranny.

There was a 12-day transit strike in New York in 1966, and the courts enjoined the walkout as contrary to the public intertest. Michael J. Quill, president of the Transit Workers Union, defied the court order and said, “The judge can drop dead in his black robes.” Quill went to jail for contempt, but his name is on the facade of Transit Workers Union headquarters to this day.

The contempt power is enforced by the executive branch, which at the federal level is the U.S. Marshal Service. The Marshals are under the Justice Department, and Trump knows that Attorney General Pam Bondi is not about to send them to the White House to enforce a contempt citation.

The stark contrast is astonishing between the speed with which Trump has moved and the snail’s pace with which former President Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland moved to prosecute Trump for his misdeeds on Jan. 6 and his obstruction of justice with the Mar-a-Lago documents. Biden could have appointed an attorney general like Bondi — ready, willing and able to work his political will. Bondi has already moved swiftly to sue Trump’s nemesis, New York Attorney General Letitia James, for blocking the immigration crackdown. Bondi vows more cases of this nature will follow.

The basis for such suits is solely political, but there is nary a peep from the Democrats in Congress who are supposed to exercise oversight.

Where the rule of law ends, tyranny begins. Horrifically, Trump’s Justice Department last week ordered the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York to drop the very strong corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, who has helpfully changed positions to enforce Trump’s immigration crackdown. The order was so out of line that the Trump-appointed acting U.S. attorney and the senior prosecutor on the case resigned in protest, along with six other lawyers from the Justice Department’s Public Integrity section.

The switch was such a political sellout that four of Adams’s deputy mayors are resigning as well, and there is said to be tension with the New York Police Department, which wants to stay clear of the immigration crackdown unless the migrants commit crimes.

The Justice Department order is not necessarily the last word. District Judge Dale Ho, who has the case, may hold a hearing to delve into the whole mess. What comes out might destroy Adams politically and even end the career of acting Associate Attorney General Emil Bove, who ordered the U.S. attorney to dismiss the case.

The Justice Department said that it had not considered the merits of the Adams case, but rested its decision on the premise that no official like Adams running for office should be prosecuted before an election. Baloney! There is no law, decision or policy that has ever said that. Quite the opposite. Chief Justice John Roberts just reaffirmed that no one is above the law.

Trump and Musk are playing fast and loose with presidential and constitutional norms. As every child learns (or should learn) in high school civics we have three co-equal branches of government serving as a system of checks and balances against each other. Since the Marbury v. Madison case of 1803, it has been the province of the judiciary to decide whether one branch is asserting more power than it constitutionally possesses.

The courts have no army to enforce their decisions, but their stature is such that even presidents have — almost always — respected their decisions. When President Harry Truman illegally seized the steel mills in 1952, the Supreme Court said he couldn’t do it, and he backed off. When the high court ordered President Richard Nixon to turn over the White House tapes in 1974, he eventually complied, even though he knew the tapes would incriminate him.

Most of the plaintiffs in the current lawsuits have won temporary orders to stop Trump from proceeding with his plans. But these are just interim orders to freeze the status quo. We will have to see what unfolds as these cases wind their way through the courts.

Democrats are on the receiving end of a bum rush. They need to think outside the box and get tough. Maybe a quiet pledge to make significant contributions to the reelection campaign of any Republican member of Congress who is primaried for voting against Trump? That might get some attention.

Asked what the American people want from Democrats, a shellshocked Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) could only sputter, “They want us to beat Trump and stop this s‑‑‑.” Some answer, as the unelected Musk rubbishes the republic.

James D. Zirin, author and legal analyst, is a former federal prosecutor in New York’s Southern District. He is also the host of the public television talk show and podcast “Conversations with Jim Zirin.”