Politics has always had a way of dividing people, but few figures have ignited as much passionate reaction—both love and hate—as Donald Trump.
Now, one Republican lawmaker wants to dig deeper into why some Americans seem to be so emotionally triggered by the former (and now again current) president.
The “Trump Derangement Syndrome” Bill Hits Congress
Congressman Warren Davidson, a Republican from Ohio, just introduced a new piece of legislation: The Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) Research Act of 2025
. His goal? To get the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to study what he and others call “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”
TDS is a term often thrown around by Trump supporters to describe what they see as irrational, over-the-top outrage or obsession with anything involving Donald Trump.
Critics have used terms like “fascist,” “dictator,” or “enemy of democracy” to describe him, and the reactions have ranged from heated protests to even two attempted assassinations.
Davidson believes this extreme political reaction deserves serious scientific inquiry.
A Closer Look at the Symptoms and Scope
According to the bill, TDS includes “intense, irrational emotional or cognitive reactions” to Trump, his actions, or simply his presence.
Davidson argues that the condition has torn apart families, fueled nationwide violence, and divided the country.
The bill proposes that the NIH use existing resources—without additional taxpayer costs—to research the phenomenon.
The research would examine how TDS develops, what its long-term effects are, and how it might be treated or managed.
It would even attempt to trace its earliest origins—finding a sort of “patient zero.”
The Media’s Role Under the Microscope
A key part of the proposed study is looking at how media coverage might have contributed to the rise of TDS.
The legislation claims that early signs of the condition were visible in the way news outlets reported on Trump’s campaign rhetoric, possibly fueling polarized reactions across the country.
Davidson argues that understanding the media’s influence is crucial, especially if it’s helping to stoke emotional or aggressive responses.
Redirecting NIH Funds—No New Spending, Says Davidson
Davidson insists the study wouldn’t require any new funding.
Instead, it would repurpose money the NIH already uses on what he sees as less relevant projects.
He pointed to past NIH-funded studies—like giving meth to cats or teaching monkeys to gamble for water—as examples of questionable spending.
In contrast, he says, understanding the psychological response to a former U.S. president is a much more practical use of government research money.
What Happens Next?
The bill is co-sponsored by Alabama Republican Barry Moore.
Still, its chances of becoming law are uncertain.
With House Republicans currently focused on pushing a massive, multi-trillion-dollar package to enact Trump’s broader agenda, this TDS bill might get pushed to the back burner.
There are also questions about whether there’s enough support—even among Republicans—for this kind of legislation to move forward.
Earlier this year, a similar bill was introduced by GOP lawmakers in Minnesota that would have officially labeled TDS a disorder, describing it as expressions of “intense hostility” and even acts of violence against Trump supporters.
Will Congress Take It Seriously?
With a looming deadline before Memorial Day to pass major legislation, this proposal might not get the immediate attention its backers hope for.
But it has certainly sparked debate—not just about Trump, but about the broader cultural and emotional reaction to his presidency.
In the end, the question remains: is this just political theater, or is there something deeper worth exploring in the emotional responses Donald Trump continues to provoke?