What he's done. Why it matters.

Before we judge a president by how he makes us feel—powerful, angry, vindicated, hopeful—we should begin with a simpler, more honest question: what did he actually do? Because if we can’t name the deeds, we can’t assess the direction. And if we don’t assess the direction, we risk mistaking movement for progress. Now, in the early months of Donald J. Trump’s second term as president of the United States, that question has returned with urgency. He has been president twice. We have lived through his first full term and have just crossed the one-hundred-day threshold of his second. Whether you love him, fear him, or simply want the noise to stop, the question remains the same: what has he done, and what kind of country do those actions shape?

During his first term in office from 2017 to 2021, Donald Trump governed like a disruptor. He saw entrenched norms as obstacles, bureaucrats as enemies, and tradition as an outdated suggestion. His biggest legislative achievement was the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which dramatically lowered the corporate tax rate and provided temporary tax relief to individuals. The bill was popular with corporations and investors, but critics noted that the benefits were disproportionately skewed toward the wealthy, exacerbating economic inequality and ballooning the national debt.

In his push to reduce what he called “job-killing regulations,” Trump’s administration aggressively rolled back more than a hundred rules across environmental, labor, and consumer safety sectors. His supporters viewed this as a liberation of business from red tape. Opponents saw it as a dangerous unraveling of protections that could have long-term public health and ecological consequences. On immigration, he adopted some of the most hardline policies in modern American history. His “zero tolerance” policy led to the separation of thousands of children from their families at the southern border. He implemented the “Remain in Mexico” program, requiring asylum seekers to wait outside the country while their cases were processed, and oversaw the construction of over 400 miles of new and reinforced border wall.

One of the more unexpected successes of his first term was the passage of the First Step Act, a bipartisan criminal justice reform bill that reduced mandatory minimum sentences and expanded rehabilitation and early release programs for nonviolent offenders. This legislative win stood out as a rare moment of consensus during a presidency marked by intense polarization.

On foreign policy, Trump withdrew the United States from several major international agreements, including the Paris Climate Accord and the Iran Nuclear Deal. He shifted U.S. recognition of Israel’s capital from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and oversaw the construction of a new U.S. embassy there, a move praised by Israeli leadership and pro-Israel advocates but condemned by Palestinian authorities and much of the Arab world. He later brokered the Abraham Accords, facilitating normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab states.

His presidency was also defined by its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. On one hand, his administration helped launch Operation Warp Speed, which accelerated vaccine development and distribution. On the other, his mixed messaging, frequent downplaying of the virus, and public clashes with health officials undermined national cohesion and sowed public distrust during a public health emergency. He was impeached twice—once over a phone call with Ukraine’s president, which was seen by many as an abuse of power, and a second time for incitement of insurrection following the January 6th Capitol riot. He was acquitted in both trials by a Republican-controlled Senate.

In 2024, Donald Trump was re-elected, defeating Kamala Harris. His return to the presidency came not with the theme of disruption, but with a clear vow of retribution. In his first hundred days back in office, that vow has taken shape. Immigration policy has shifted dramatically once again. Humanitarian protections have been revoked. Thousands of migrants, including children and long-settled families, are being deported. The administration has used the Alien Enemies Act—an obscure wartime provision—to detain and remove individuals without standard due process. The CBP One mobile app, once used to streamline lawful entry, has been repurposed to notify migrants of their deportation status. Student visas have been revoked for protestors and critics, a move seen by civil liberties groups as an authoritarian misuse of immigration power.

On the economic front, Trump announced sweeping new tariffs under the banner of “Liberation Day.” As of April 2, 2025, the U.S. now imposes a 10% universal tariff on all imports, invoking emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The announcement sent shockwaves through global markets. Consumer prices began rising almost immediately. Economists warned of inflationary pressures and retaliatory tariffs from trade partners. Trump’s defenders praised the move as a bold reassertion of American manufacturing and sovereignty. His critics called it economic self-sabotage.

Inside the federal government, Trump has launched an aggressive restructuring campaign. Over 30,000 federal employees have been dismissed in the early months of this term. An executive order has eliminated collective bargaining rights for many public sector workers. The administration has revived “Schedule F,” a policy that reclassifies civil servants in a way that makes them easier to fire and replace with political loyalists. A new entity, the Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, has begun reorganizing and cutting federal agencies, including USAID and the Department of Education. Critics argue that this effort amounts to a politicized purge, hollowing out the state in order to centralize power.

In education, Trump has issued executive orders tying federal funding to compliance with new mandates that target diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. Accreditation boards for universities are being scrutinized and pressured to abandon what the administration calls “woke ideology.” In K-12 education, new guidelines are being drafted to reverse discipline policies meant to address racial disparities. The new approach emphasizes behavior-based discipline, ignoring the systemic inequities many say those disparities reflect.

In foreign policy, the United States has once again withdrawn from the Paris Climate Agreement and halted all involvement with the World Health Organization. The administration has adopted a more “neutral” stance on the war in Ukraine, calling for a peace agreement that Ukrainian leaders say would amount to surrender. The move has alienated NATO allies and raised questions about the U.S. commitment to democratic norms abroad.

Public sentiment has started to shift. According to recent polling, a majority of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of immigration, the economy, and education. Legal battles are already mounting over the federal firings, the union contract terminations, and the new immigration policies. Yet despite—or perhaps because of—the backlash, Trump’s inner circle remains convinced that they are on the right course. They believe the nation must be remade, not managed.

So the question returns: is he good for the nation?

That depends entirely on what you believe a nation should be. If a strong nation is one where the president alone defines loyalty, restructures the state, and punishes resistance, then Trump has delivered. He has removed constraints, weakened opposing forces, and centralized power in ways unseen in modern American history. If, however, a strong nation is one that balances power among institutions, honors due process, upholds the rights of dissenters, and treats its civil servants not as enemies but as part of the democratic fabric, then these last months mark not strength, but rupture.

Ultimately, this is not only a question about Trump. It is a question about us. Do we want government by spectacle, by loyalty, by force? Or do we still believe in a republic of laws—messy, flawed, constrained by checks, but rooted in something larger than any one person? A president’s record is not measured by how loudly he speaks, but by what his words do to the institutions meant to outlast him. The facts are on the table. The legacy is still being written. The verdict, as always, is ours to give.