S.F. No. 2589 Sparks Debate Over Politics and Psychiatric Classification

March 15, 2025 - St. Paul, Minnesota - Minnesota Senate Republicans have ignited a firestorm of controversy with the introduction of S.F. No. 2589, a bill that proposes to classify "Trump Derangement Syndrome" (TDS) as a recognized mental illness under state law. Unveiled this week during the Ninety-Fourth Legislative Session, the legislation aims to amend Minnesota’s mental health statutes by defining TDS as an “acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal persons” triggered by reactions to the policies and presidencies of President Donald J. Trump.

Sponsored by Senators Eric Lucero, Steve Drazkowski, Nathan Wesenberg, Justin D. Eichorn, and Glenn Gruenhagen—all Republicans—the bill describes TDS as a condition marked by symptoms like “intense verbal hostility toward Trump” and an “inability to distinguish between legitimate policy differences and perceived pathology” in his behavior. If passed, it would add TDS to the state’s diagnostic codes for mental illness, potentially impacting eligibility for mental health services and raising questions about its legal and medical implications.

“This isn’t just a jab at the left—it’s a recognition of a real phenomenon,” said Sen. Lucero in a statement Friday. “We’ve seen people lose all sense of reason when it comes to Trump. It’s time to call it what it is.” The bill, referred to the Health and Human Services Committee on March 17, has already drawn sharp reactions, blending humor, outrage, and skepticism across the political spectrum.

The term "Trump Derangement Syndrome" has long been a pejorative used by Trump supporters to mock critics who exhibit extreme opposition to the former and current president. Coined by the late columnist Charles Krauthammer during the George W. Bush era as “Bush Derangement Syndrome” and later adapted for Trump, TDS is not recognized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Critics argue the bill is a political stunt rather than a serious health policy, accusing Republicans of weaponizing mental health rhetoric to silence dissent.

“This is absurd and dangerous,” said Dr. Sarah Mendelsohn, a Minneapolis-based psychiatrist. “Mental illness is a clinical diagnosis, not a legislative toy. Codifying a satirical term risks trivializing real disorders and could be abused to target political opponents.” Democrats in the Senate echoed her concerns, with Minority Leader Mark Johnson calling it “a cheap gimmick that undermines serious governance.”

Yet supporters see it as a bold move to address what they call an epidemic of irrational Trump hatred. “Look at the riots, the lawsuits, the endless media meltdowns—something’s unhinged here,” said conservative activist Laura Hensley at a small rally outside the Capitol. “Maybe this bill forces a reckoning.”

If enacted, S.F. No. 2589 would amend Minnesota Statutes 2024, sections 245.462 and 245I.02, integrating TDS into definitions used for mental health services and case management. Legal experts warn it could open a Pandora’s box—potentially allowing courts or employers to label anti-Trump behavior as a disability, or even justifying interventions like mandatory treatment. “It’s a slippery slope to politicizing psychiatry,” noted University of Minnesota law professor Jill Hasday.

The bill lands amid a charged national climate, with Trump’s second term underway and his policies—like immigration crackdowns and tariff plans—stoking fierce debate. Posts on X reflect the divide: some hail it as “genius trolling,” while others decry it as “authoritarian nonsense.” One user quipped, “Next they’ll diagnose ‘Biden Fatigue Syndrome’—oh wait, that’s just napping.”

With Minnesota’s Senate narrowly controlled by Republicans (34-33) but facing a Democratic House and Gov. Tim Walz, the bill’s passage seems unlikely without significant revisions. Mental health advocates plan to testify against it at upcoming committee hearings, arguing it distracts from pressing issues like funding for addiction treatment. Still, its introduction underscores a broader trend: the fusion of politics and provocation in an era of deepening polarization.

For now, S.F. No. 2589 stands as a lightning rod—equal parts satire and salvo in America’s culture wars. Whether it fades into obscurity or reshapes the mental health landscape, one thing’s clear: in Minnesota, Trump remains a diagnosis all his own.