The so-called Deep State in the United States has intervened in numerous legal and political cases, involving controversial events and transformations that sparked suspicions about the influence of secret, undeclared powers on American policies and interests. Chief among these is the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, which remains one of the most prominent cases raising doubts about the involvement of intelligence agencies and Deep State elements in undermining officials who posed a threat to their interests. Another example is the Watergate scandal (1972–1974), linked to President Richard Nixon, in which the espionage operation against the Democratic Party and subsequent leaks from inside government institutions helped expose the affair. The journalist known as “Deep Throat” was one of the key sources.
The U.S. intelligence services have also been accused of interfering in foreign policy, employing espionage, sabotage, and violence under the pretext of counter-terrorism, while broadening the concept of terrorism to cover multiple political and military roles. Allegations of Deep State influence have also surrounded American elections, particularly during the rise and campaigns of Donald Trump, where government agencies and experts were accused of organising pressure campaigns and disinformation efforts to sway election outcomes. Moreover, there exists a complex web of relations between the federal bureaucracy, members of Congress, the media, and lobbying groups that work to advance their interests in Washington, D.C.
Donald Trump consistently presented himself as a fighter against the Deep State, threatening to expose alleged surveillance and corruption within government institutions, while adopting policies to restructure the administration and curb the influence of unelected officials. Thus, the interventions of the Deep State in the United States appear in areas ranging from domestic espionage and major political scandals to influence over foreign policy and attempts to shape electoral processes, making it a deeply contentious element in American politics.
Read also: The Deep State: Covert Networks & Confrontation Challenges
Trump’s Approach
John Michaels, Professor of Law at the University of California, argues that American governmental structures are “almost entirely transparent” compared with those of developing states. He highlights five key ways in which U.S. bureaucracy differs from traditional Deep States: it is not elitist, not hidden, not unified, functions as a defensive rather than offensive force, and operates within constitutional boundaries.
Political scientist Stephen Walt maintains that a Deep State does not exist in America, noting that “to the extent a bipartisan foreign policy elite exists, it hides in plain sight.” However, Tufts University Professor Michael Glennon points to former President Barack Obama’s failure to close Guantánamo Bay, despite campaign promises, as evidence of a constrained “double government.”
The civil service system provides safeguards such as the Hatch Act and administrative procedures for addressing misconduct. Yet, existing protections make it difficult to dismiss federal employees. In fiscal year 2020, the dismissal rate was only 0.25% of covered employees. These protections create space for resistance but also ensure stability and expertise across administrations.
Trump’s approach to dismantling the alleged Deep State included reclassifying positions under Schedule “F”, converting tens of thousands of professional posts into political appointments, creating a “Department of Government Efficiency” headed by Elon Musk to cut spending and shrink the civil service, and purging federal law enforcement by restructuring the FBI, DOJ, and FISA courts. His plans also included relocating agencies out of Washington, D.C. and expanding presidential control over spending by bypassing Congress through impoundment.
Read also: The Deep State in the Arab World: How Regimes Survive Revolutions
Parliamentary and Legal Opposition
Democratic lawmakers strongly opposed claims about the Deep State and resisted changes to staffing. Senator Dick Durbin criticised Trump’s nominee Kash Patel as an “extreme MAGA loyalist who could make our country less safe.” A so-called “enemies list” of 60 alleged Deep State members prompted some individuals to take protective measures, including relocating their families.
Legal challenges and resistance from federal employees emerged as primary opposition tactics. The largest federal workers’ union reported record growth, with 4,000 new members joining in February 2025 alone. Federal employees organised protests, pursued legal actions, and worked to shape public opinion.
Career civil servants and their supporters argue that they provide essential checks on presidential power and act as guardians of democratic institutions. They stress their role in ensuring continuity, expertise, and adherence to the law across shifting political administrations. For some, acts of resistance are not partisan defiance but rather defence of constitutional principles and democratic norms.
In the end, the debate about the Deep State reflects broader tensions between democratic accountability and administrative expertise, political control and institutional stability, elected authority and professional competence. While claims of a coordinated conspiracy lack concrete evidence, the underlying tensions surrounding bureaucratic power, political authority, and democratic governance remain central to American political discourse.
