Visualizing the erosion of American democracy

Democracy is measurable.

Imperfectly, I’ll admit, but it is still possible to evaluate the extent to which nations reflect democratic values over time. Free and fair elections, systems of checks and balances, commitment to free expression: these are principles that are present or are not, systems that may be implemented in part or universally.

The Varieties of Democracy project at the University of Gothenburg has done this measurement for more than a decade, establishing a consistent metric that allows for comparisons between and within nations and determinations of how democracy has changed over time.

On Tuesday, its most recent data, covering 2025, was released. And what it determined was that measures of democracy in the U.S. slid backward dramatically during the first year of Donald Trump’s second term.

This will not be surprising to hear, no doubt, nor would it be surprising to anyone who understood how the nation’s democracy slipped the first time he was president. But the erosion was still dramatic, finding that America’s adherence to democratic principles had dropped to levels not seen since before the Voting Rights Act was passed.

In fact, it was one of the most dramatic single-year drop in modern history. The United States, according to this measure, no longer counts as a liberal democracy.

Before we explore how this change occurred, it’s worth contextualizing the U.S. globally. American democracy is still more robust than most other countries, including neighbors like Mexico. But while democracies in Europe have also seen backsliding, the extent of the U.S.’s recent shift is exceptional.

That said, the international trend since 1960 has generally been toward greater democracy — or, at least, stasis. Along with the U.S., some democracies in Europe have similarly seen erosions that function as an erasure of the past 60 years.

If we look at the last century, we can see how American democracy improved and then eroded. A slow upward increase and, suddenly, a downward spike.

(The meaning of the category headers in this and the next chart are explained below.)

Notice the measures of judicial and legislative constraints that I highlighted above. This is an assessment of the effectiveness of checks on presidential power. Judicial constraints faded, thanks in part to the Supreme Court’s broad willingness to facilitate Trump’s seizure of power. The constraints of the legislature — meaning Congress — all but collapsed.

There are other noticeable shifts, too, that we can see when we zoom in to the last 10 years. The decline in freedom of expression, the drops in rule of law and egalitarianism: each of these has been obvious, particularly in the past 12 months, but it is still striking to see depicted so explicitly.

If there is a silver lining here, it’s that the U.S.’s score rebounded (modestly) once Trump left office. Institutions stiffened. Guiderails were (also modestly) mended. Backsliding is neither inevitable nor irreversible.

If, however, you are more interested in how much more empty the glass can get, consider the other aspects of democracy that we know are under attack. How will the measure of free and fair elections shift the next time V-Dem conducts its analysis?

It’s a reminder of another consideration. The U.S.’s rating fell in 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 — each year of Trump’s first term. He has almost three more years left in his second.

Photo: The president receives a hat. (Flickr/The White House)

The categories that contribute to the measurement of democracy:

Freedom of Expression. Whether the press, citizens, academics, and cultural figures can speak and publish freely without government censorship or retaliation.
Freedom of Association. Whether people can form political parties, join opposition movements, and organize civil society groups without restriction or harassment.
Suffrage. The share of adult citizens legally entitled to vote in national elections.
Free & Fair Elections. Whether elections are conducted without fraud, voter intimidation, vote-buying, or violence that distorts the result.
Elected Officials. Whether the head of government and the legislature actually reach power through popular elections rather than appointment or other means.
Liberal Component. Whether individual and minority rights are protected against overreach by the state or the majority, through civil liberties, independent courts, and checks on power.
Rule of Law. Whether laws are applied transparently and equally to everyone, and whether citizens have access to justice, property rights, freedom of movement, and physical security.
Judicial Constraints. Whether the executive respects court rulings and constitutional limits, and whether the judiciary operates independently from political pressure.
Legislative Constraints. Whether the legislature and oversight bodies can meaningfully question, investigate, and hold the executive accountable.
Participatory Component. Whether citizens engage in politics beyond just voting — through civil society organizations, direct democracy mechanisms, and elected local and regional governments.
Civil Society Participation. How robustly citizens organize and engage: whether CSOs are consulted on policy, how active and independent civic life is, and how inclusive political participation is across groups.
Deliberative Component. Whether political decisions are driven by reasoned public argument and appeals to the common good, rather than emotional manipulation, narrow interests, or coercion.
Egalitarian Component. Whether rights, political access, and economic resources are distributed equally across social groups regardless of class, gender, or group identity.