GEOFF BENNETT: President Trump's# social media post over the weekend,## "He who saves his country does not violate# any law," implying that he is above the law,## triggered alarm bells from experts# who were already concerned about the## legal and constitutional boundaries tested in# President Trump's first few weeks in office.

Kim Lane Scheppele is the Laurance S.# Rockefeller professor of sociology and## international affairs at Princeton University.# She studies the rise and fall of democratic## governments.

Amna spoke with her earlier# as part of our new series On Democracy.

AMNA NAWAZ: Kim Lane Scheppele, welcome back# to the "News Hour."

Thanks for being here.

KIM LANE SCHEPPELE, Princeton# University: Very nice to be here.

AMNA NAWAZ: So, many of President# Trump's actions we have seen so## far that are already being challenged on the# basis of their legality or constitutionality,## these are things he promised to# do, said he would do as president.

He would say now this is what voters want him# to do and so he's doing it as fast as he can## through executive orders.

How do you see that?

KIM LANE SCHEPPELE: Well, it's true.

A lot of## these are things he promised, but democracy isn't# just about getting elected and meeting promises.## You have to fulfill the promises, if you're# going to do them, in the proper legal way.

So what he's just been doing is# signing a lot of executive orders,## and a lot of these executive orders directly# conflict laws passed by Congress.

They directly## conflict with constitutional provisions,# and that's not the way that you can do it.

AMNA NAWAZ: This is also a president who# has praised strongmen in other countries,## authoritarian leaders in other nations,# people like Vladimir Putin in Russia,## Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Viktor Orban in Hungary.

As someone who has lived# in both Russia and Hungary,## are you seeing patterns here# that mirror what you saw there?

KIM LANE SCHEPPELE: Yes, absolutely.

So the thing about these strongmen leaders# is that what makes t.. have managed to escape legal constraints on# their power.

So they have neutralized their## parliaments so that they don't talk back to# them.

They have captured their courts so that## they don't override them.

They have altered the# election law so that no one can get rid of them.

And that seems to be the model that Trump is# really finding very attractive.

And so what he## admires about them is that they have been able# to govern essentially in an unconstitutional## way.

And you see him now really going after# the constraints on his own executive power.

AMNA NAWAZ: We have also seen the# targeting with very specific groups like## immigrants and transgender people.

Is# that something you have seen before?

KIM LANE SCHEPPELE: Absolutely.

Picking scapegoats is partly a way of generating public#..

But it's also a way of saying to people who# might challenge this government, this could## happen to you.

So if you step out of line, you# can see what happens.

You fall into this abyss of## arbitrary treatment, where the law cannot protect# you and where we are going to come after you.

So it's really a way of generating fear# not only in the targeted categories,## but beyond the targeted categories, to people who# are not on board with the president's program.

AMNA NAWAZ: And, Kim, as someone who looks at how# leaders govern and lead in these ways, are you## seeing something markedly different in Trump's# second administration compared to his first?

KIM LANE SCHEPPELE: Trump 1.0, I mean, he just# flailed around.

He had a lot of ideas.

But he## didn't entrench himself.

He didn't attack# the institutions.

So he sort of dropped## government on the floor, but he didn't try# to completely change the way it operated.

Second time, he comes back and he's got# lawyers.

Everything is legal.

That's why## you see the flurry of executive orders.

You see# these memos going out saying the president has## commanded this in law.

And so he's going after the# civil service, for example.

And civil servants who## work from one government to another, from# Republican to a Democratic administration,## and back again, are used to having somebody# say, this is now the law, you follow it.

And so this is where he's trying to get# the civil service to completely change## the way the state is organizing itself.

And# those people who are not willing to do that,## he's offering that they be displaced, fired,# put on this kind of imaginary leave and so on.

And so he's trying to really control the# bureaucracy doing it by law.

So he's got## lawyers this time.

That means he can do way# more damage than he could do the first time.

AMNA NAWAZ: In the countries that you have lived# and studied, strongmen and authoritarian leaders,## what have you seen in the way of a public# response to some of those actions?

And did## it shift anything?

Was it able to sort of# slow the decline in democracy or reverse it?

KIM LANE SCHEPPELE: A people who experience# this have to know what they're seeing.

And so, in Hungary, for example, which# was one of the first countries where it## was just this blitz of everything everywhere# all at once, people were so disoriented and## everybody was being hit in different ways.

You# saw everyone just trying to protect themselves,## their own group.

They didn't really unify.# They didn't know what they were experiencing.

So when it happened a few years later# in Poland, then the Poles knew, aha,## this is how the Hungarians did it.# And you saw them rise up.

You saw## them try to defend the independence of the# judiciary when it was being attacked.

There## was way more civil sector mobilization# because they understood what was coming.

So the problem we have in the U.S. is that# Americans haven't seen this before.

So## they don't know what it means.

They don't know# what it adds up to.

They think it's Trump 1.0,## but Trump 1.0 didn't do as much lasting damage as# Trump 2.0 has already done in the first few weeks.

AMNA NAWAZ: We should also say the U.S.# is not Hungary.

It's not Russia.

It's## not Brazil.

There are people who# say our democracy is different,## and it's not susceptible to many of those# same forces, that Trump couldn't do here## what Putin did in Russia or Orban did# in Hungary.

What do you say to that?

KIM LANE SCHEPPELE: Well, there's something# to that because the U.S. government is## very big.

It's very complicated.# There are lots of choke points,## lots of institutions things have to pass# through.

And the simpler a government is,## the easier it is to knock over.

We# think we have all this protection.

But think of the kind of protection we have.# The separation of powers and our federalism## sort of depend on every institution# at federal level defending itself and## its own prerogatives.

It relies on the states# defending themselves and their own prerogatives.

But what we have now is something that some law# professors have called not separation of powers,## but separation of parties.

And so if# you get a party that is as organized## as the present Republican Party is, the# Republicans in Congress will defend the## Republican in the White House.

The Republican# judges will rule in favor of the Republican## in the White House.

The Republican# governors will also jump on board.

And so the institutional protections really# fall apart when you have this kind of party## discipline that runs through all the# institutions and then the institutions## don't provide the checks anymore.

So# the U.S. is way more vulnerable than I## think our classic separation of powers# model really would lead us to believe.

AMNA NAWAZ: Kim Lane Scheppele# of Princeton University, thank## you.

We really appreciate your time and insights.

KIM LANE SCHEPPELE: Glad# you're working on this topic.