"A fundamental safeguard against abuse of power"

 

Trump’s bellicose posture toward Greenland is absolutely unacceptable. Are we to live in a world where a powerful nation can declare, “It is in our national interest to take your resources, and because we have the power to do so, we are entitled to take them”? That logic is nothing more than a return to crude imperialism, dressed up in the language of national security. It undermines international law, disregards the sovereignty of smaller nations, and normalizes coercion as a legitimate tool of statecraft. If adopted broadly, this worldview would erode the foundations of global stability and replace diplomacy with raw force.

When a president openly advances such reckless and destabilizing ideas, it is reasonable and necessary to consider the constitutional mechanisms designed to protect the country from dangerous leadership. In theory, the United States is not without safeguards. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment allows the vice president and a majority of the cabinet to declare a president unfit to serve, temporarily transferring power to prevent further harm.

This mechanism exists precisely to address situations in which a president’s judgment, temperament, or conduct poses a serious threat. In practice, however, it is clear that Trump’s cabinet is the last body we can rely on to restrain him. Its members have consistently demonstrated personal loyalty, political calculation, or fear of reprisal rather than an independent commitment to constitutional duty. Expecting this group to invoke the Twenty-Fifth Amendment is therefore unrealistic. That reality leaves impeachment and removal from office as the only viable constitutional remedy.

Impeachment is not a partisan weapon; it is a fundamental safeguard against abuse of power. When a president signals contempt for international norms, threatens the sovereignty of other nations, and treats power as its own justification, Congress has an obligation to act. Removal from office is not about punishing a personality or settling political scores; it is about reaffirming that no president is above the law and that the United States does not endorse governance by intimidation or force. Failing to act in such circumstances risks normalizing dangerous behavior and weakening the very democratic institutions meant to prevent it.

-Martin Tracy