The denial machine: how institutions perform legitimacy while failingthe people

Purpose This study aims to examine how Project 2025’s blueprint for dismantling democratic institutions exemplifies symbolic governance - the maintenance of legal forms while systematically excluding participation and accountability. Using Puerto Rico’s territorial subordination and Project 2025’s proposed civil service purges as case studies, this research reframes legality as a potential mask for authoritarian consolidation rather than a guarantee of justice. Design/methodology/approach This study applies normative-philosophical framework (Dworkin, Fuller, Fraser) to Puerto Rico and Project 2025 case studies, supplemented by World Values Survey data with ordinal logistic regression testing correlations between institutional trust and perceived political legitimacy. Findings Symbolic legality enables institutions to simulate legitimacy while suppressing justice, as demonstrated through Puerto Rico’s territorial subordination and Project 2025’s formalization of authoritarianism. Trust in courts correlates with democratic legitimacy, while trust in police correlates with disillusionment, revealing bifurcated legitimacy. Research limitations/implications Limited to cross-sectional data and specific political contexts, broader generalization requires comparative cross-national research. Framework provides foundation for analyzing ethical pathologies of legal institutions. Practical implications This study recommends evaluating legal institutions by ethical integrity, not just procedural metrics. This study proposes reforms emphasizing epistemic inclusion, participatory justice and legal intelligibility in postcolonial and fragile democratic contexts. Social implications Institutional denial corrodes democratic accountability even in societies priding themselves on legal order. This study calls for reimagining law’s role in advancing justice rather than performing compliance. Originality/value This study bridges legal philosophy, political theory and empirical social science to introduce symbolic governance as ethical pathology. It offers new normative vocabulary for analyzing legal systems under moral strain.