Simone Lawson
Former US President Donald Trump faced severe backlash from both Republicans and Democrats for his comments on 'terminating' the US Constitution in the wake of the 2020 election results. While Trump later attempted to walk back his remarks, claiming that the media was trying to make him look bad, several senators criticized him for his statement, calling it a betrayal of our Oath of Office and an affront to our Republic. The termination of the Constitution would imply a declaration of war against the founding principles of the US government and the rule of law. However, it is important to note that there are several copies of the Constitution, and it is unlikely that they would all be destroyed.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Possibility of termination | Unlikely |
| Impact on the rule of law | Negative |
| Public opinion | Negative |
| Political opinion | Negative |
| Number of original copies | 13 |
| Number of copies in private hands | 2 |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Trump's call for termination
In December 2022, former US President Donald Trump called for the termination of the United States Constitution, citing his long-debunked claim that the 2020 election was stolen from him due to massive fraud. In a post on his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump wrote:
> Do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great 'Founders' did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!
Trump's comments were widely rebuked by politicians from both parties, including Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, who said he "vehemently" disagreed and "absolutely" condemned the remarks. Incoming House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries described Trump's statement as "strange and extreme", and said that Republicans would have to decide whether to continue embracing Trump's anti-democratic views. The White House spokesman Andrew Bates also criticised Trump, stating:
> The American Constitution is a sacrosanct document that for over 200 years has guaranteed that freedom and the rule of law prevail in our great country. Attacking the Constitution and all it stands for is anathema to the soul of our nation.
Trump's call for the termination of the Constitution is particularly concerning given his previous violation of his oath to protect and defend the US Constitution, by instigating the January 6th insurrection and attack on the Capitol. Furthermore, Trump has frequently mused about the idea of serving a third term as president, which is prohibited by the 22nd Amendment, suggesting there were "methods" of circumventing this rule. Trump's comments underscore his disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law, and highlight the ongoing threat he poses to American democracy.
Reading Disabilities: A Multilingual Perspective
You may want to see also
Safeguards enshrined in the Bill of Rights
The United States Bill of Rights comprises the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. It was proposed following the 1787–88 debate over the ratification of the Constitution and written to address the objections raised by Anti-Federalists. James Madison, often called the Father of the Constitution, drafted the Bill of Rights and introduced the amendments to Congress in 1789. Madison believed that without explicit protections, the newly formed federal government could become as oppressive as the monarchy the colonies had fought to escape.
The amendments of the Bill of Rights add to the Constitution specific guarantees of personal freedoms, such as freedom of speech, the right to publish, practice and worship religion, possess firearms, to assemble, privacy, due process, and other natural and legal rights. The Fourth Amendment safeguards citizens' right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion in their homes through the requirement of a warrant. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury, while the Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bail, fines, or cruel and unusual punishments.
The Bill of Rights thus imposes legal limits on the powers of governments and acts as an anti-majoritarian/minoritarian safeguard by providing deeply entrenched legal protection for various civil liberties and fundamental rights. The amendments ensure that some liberties would endure beyond political majorities. Madison's careful balance between state and personal rights continues to form the backbone of American civil liberties today.
The Landmark Case: Segregation's Constitutionality Questioned
You may want to see also
The American people's veneration
The American people hold the Constitution in high regard, seeing it as a sacred document that has guaranteed freedom and the rule of law for over 200 years. They recognise its importance in protecting the rights of every American and view any attempt to terminate it as a betrayal of the oath of office and an affront to the Republic. This sentiment is reflected in the words of Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who tweeted that Trump's suggestion to terminate the Constitution was "a betrayal of our Oath of Office [and] an affront to our Republic."
The Constitution is deeply ingrained in the nation's history and principles of governance. It begins with the powerful words "We the people," a reminder that the government exists because of the people and for the people. This core idea resonates with Americans, who value their role in the democratic process. Any perceived threat to the Constitution is seen as an attack on the very foundation of their nation.
Despite the American people's strong attachment to the Constitution, there have been instances where its integrity has been questioned. Some have argued that the safeguards enshrined in the Bill of Rights, meant to protect citizens from government overreach, have been eroded over time with the support of Congress, the White House, and the courts. This has led to a perception that the Constitution may be on "life support", with its core principles gradually being undermined.
ADA Barriers: Can Seeing Them Be Considered an Encounter?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$5.99 $19.95
A new constitutional convention
The termination of the US Constitution would be an unprecedented event in the country's history, and it is unclear what the exact consequences would be. However, it is worth noting that there are multiple copies of the Constitution, and it is highly venerated by the American people, making its termination unlikely.
That being said, if the Constitution were terminated, one possible outcome could be the calling of a new constitutional convention. According to Article V of the 1787 Constitution, two-thirds of the states can call for such a convention, and the new constitution they produce would become the fundamental law of the land once ratified by three-quarters of the states. While this process has never been invoked in over 200 years, it presents a potential pathway to a new constitution if the current one is terminated.
Additionally, a new constitutional convention could address the concerns of those who feel their rights have been infringed upon by the current Constitution. For instance, Donald Trump's comments about terminating the Constitution arose from his dissatisfaction with the 2020 election results. A new convention could potentially address election procedures and ensure fair and transparent processes that are accepted by a majority of the country.
However, calling a new constitutional convention is not without its challenges. The current Constitution is deeply entrenched in American society and politics, and any changes would require broad consensus across a diverse range of stakeholders. Additionally, there is a risk that a new convention could lead to the erosion of certain rights and freedoms that are currently protected by the Constitution. As Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska tweeted, suggesting the termination of the Constitution is "a betrayal of our Oath of Office [and] an affront to our Republic."
In conclusion, while the termination of the Constitution and the calling of a new constitutional convention are highly unlikely and unprecedented events, they are not impossible. If such an event were to occur, it would have profound consequences for the country, and the process of drafting a new constitution would need to be handled with extreme care and broad participation to ensure the protection of the rights and freedoms of all Americans.
Abusive Language and Workplace Harassment: What's the Verdict?
You may want to see also
The Presidential Contingency
The "Presidential Contingency" is a hypothetical scenario that would be triggered if the physical original copy of the U.S. Constitution was destroyed. While it is important to note that this is purely speculative and not a formal procedure, the idea of the "Presidential Contingency" is likely a reference to the potential consequences and response protocols that would be enacted in such an unprecedented event.
The lighthearted reference to the Washington Monument releasing the ghost of George Washington suggests that the "Presidential Contingency" is a humorous concept, not to be taken seriously. However, it underscores the significance of the Constitution in American society and governance.
In reality, the termination or destruction of the Constitution would have profound implications. The Constitution is the foundational document of the United States, outlining the rights and freedoms of its citizens and serving as the framework for the nation's legal and governmental systems. Its termination would likely result in a period of uncertainty, with potential impacts on the stability of the country.
While the physical destruction of the document would not erase the principles and laws it embodies, as there are multiple copies and it is well-known, the symbolic impact would be significant. Such an event could trigger a constitutional crisis and lead to efforts to amend or rewrite the Constitution to address any vulnerabilities that allowed for its destruction.
Additionally, the termination of the Constitution could result in a power vacuum or a period of leadership uncertainty. The absence of the foundational document that outlines the powers and responsibilities of the government branches and the protection of individual rights may create confusion and potential abuses of power. It would require a comprehensive and collaborative effort to restore stability and rebuild the framework of governance.
Constitutional Isomers of Pentane: Exploring Structural Diversity
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Terminating the US Constitution would be tantamount to a declaration of war against the founding principles of the government and the rule of law. It would mean that the rights of American citizens, previously protected by the Constitution, would no longer be guaranteed.
There are two ways in which the Constitution could be terminated. The first would be to call for a new constitutional convention, as outlined in Article V of the 1787 Constitution. This would require two-thirds of the states to call for a convention, and the new constitution would become the fundamental law when three-quarters of the states ratify it. The second way would be through an actual revolution, which would involve a violent uprising and nationwide insurrection.
There has never been a successful attempt to terminate the US Constitution. However, former President Donald Trump faced widespread criticism and was rebuked for his comments suggesting the termination of the Constitution following the 2020 election results. Trump later attempted to walk back his remarks, claiming that his statement was taken out of context and misinterpreted.
