The Three Logics of Illiberalism and Public Support for Executive Transgressions in the Trump Era

Why do some citizens embrace illiberalism as a legitimate form of governance? We propose three distinct logics: opportunistic illiberalism, driven by partisan interests; order-seeking illiberalism, reflecting authoritarian predispositions; and transgressive illiberalism, rooted in antisocial personality traits. Using original survey data, we apply this conceptual framework to two executive transgressions in the Trump era: tolerance for Donald Trump breaking the law and support for granting him permanent emergency powers. The results support all three logics and strongly corroborate the role of antisocial dispositions, including among non-Trump voters. For lawbreaking, transgressive illiberalism accounts for more variance than the other two logics combined. Populist attitudes predict less support for illiberal propositions, not more. The findings identify a potential structural vulnerability of American democracy: morally pragmatic and irreverent citizens attracted to the intrinsically transgressive nature of illiberal governance.