It has been over three weeks since Donald Trump was inaugurated as our nation’s 45th president, and he has largely kept up with some of his most radical campaign promises. In these three weeks, we have also seen bitter and divisive partisan attacks, such as silencing Senator Elizabeth Warren on the Senate Floor or early-morning cabinet confirmation hearings; D.C. continues to give the appearance of sharp division along partisan lines. However, there are several issues that many Democrats and Republicans can agree on in the age of the Trump administration.

Throughout the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump made it very clear that he wished to transform relations with Russia and President Putin despite disagreement from not only the Democratic Party but also the Republican Party, both of which have traditionally viewed Russia as dangerous and not beneficial to the interests of the United States. Unfortunately, the president’s rhetoric has transformed into concrete policy in action these last three weeks. In the past, the president has tweeted his praise for Putin, but on Feb. 6, he reaffirmed this praise when he was on the Bill O'Reilly show on Fox News and degraded the perception of the U.S. by creating a false moral equivalence to the government of Putin, stating, “We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent?” The president of the U.S is equating our government to that of an autocratic killer. This false equivalence is especially glaring, as last week, longtime Putin dissident Vladimir Kara-Murza was poisoned, according to a Feb. 9 CNN article. Kara-Murza had experienced attempts of poisoning in the past, and there is suspicion that it was under the direction of Putin. While Trump was on a phone call with Putin last week, he had to pause the call to receive information he did not know regarding the Obama-era nuclear New START Treaty, a pact that has deterred the proliferation of automatic nuclear weapons from the world’s two largest nuclear weapons holders: the U.S. and Russia. Leaked information showed the president telling Putin this deal was “one of several bad deals” from the Obama Administration, according to a Feb. 9 Reuters article. However, there is no controversy regarding this deal; it has bipartisan support because it reduces the proliferation of these weapons — a beneficial change in the views of both parties. This is one policy field that members of both the Democratic and the Republican Party can unite on. This is evident through Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), who publicly blasted the president for his false equivalency regarding the U.S. and Russia, according to a Feb. 7 CBS News article, as well as through Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY.) who broke with the president in stating, “I don’t think there’s any equivalency to the way the Russians conduct themselves and the way the United States does,” according to a Feb. 5 USA Today article. For decades, the U.S. had a foreign policy position with Russia that has been mostly supported by both parties. We must continue to unite on this issue, as Russia will continue to pose a grave danger to U.S. military and diplomatic interests.

Even after a shocking win in November, Trump has insisted that mass voting fraud occurred, using that as a way to delegitimize his shortcomings in losing the popular vote to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. While the president has presented no factual evidence to support this claim, he has consistently tweeted and stated that mass voting fraud has cost him around “3 to 5 million votes” and explains why he lost the general election. If Trump had presented factual and verifiable evidence of this fraud, it would have been fully investigated. The president cannot make such drastic assertions without a single ounce of evidence. This is another area where Democrats and Republicans can agree. This was evident when McConnell, a Republican, rejected the idea of voter fraud actually hindering the elections results. McConnell stated, “I don’t think we ought to spend any federal money investigating that. I think the states can take a look at this issue,” according to a Feb. 5 article in the Hill. Breaking with the president on a crucial issue also serves as an indication to his peers that they are able to denounce such false voting claims. These false claims can lead to voter restriction which, in turn, has a disproportionately negative effect on minorities, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. This harm extends as it indicates to the president that he is able to spread lies without repercussions or checks. The presidency is an office that must be associated with the truth, and the president is harming the perception of this office.

Trump has also established a precedent for attacking federal judges who disagree with him — like Judge Curiel, who held opposing views regarding Trump University during the presidential campaign. According to a June 7, 2016 NPR article, Trump degraded the judge and claimed he was incapable of carrying out the duties of his office due to the bias of his race and Mexican descent — even though he was born in Indiana. Trump received harsh backlash for this attack in 2016, but he did not learn this crucial lesson. Last week, Trump attacked the federal courts and judges who lawfully did their duty and voiced dissent to the president’s immigration and refugee ban. The president demeaned these judges by stating that even a “high school student” could understand the importance of his ban, according to a Feb. 8 Los Angeles Times article. This is especially dangerous as the president has also implied that any threats to national security are the sole responsibility of these judges and not himself, regardless of whether his ban would have prevented these attacks. The most important criticism of Trump’s comments came from his Supreme Court Nominee, Neil Gorsuch, who called the censures “demoralizing” and “disheartening,” according to a Feb. 8 article in The Hill. For decades, presidents have seen their policy ambitions overruled by the courts and the checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution. Trump breaks precedent in publicly attacking judges for doing their constitutional duty. This is dangerous; we must protect the courts from such control, as they safeguard constituents from abuses of power. While we are living in bitter partisan times, there are several issues we can use to unite both parties to protect the constituents of the United States.