Cairo: Hani Kamal El-Din
he recently elected President of the United States, Donald Trump, has responded to an article published in The Hill, an American news outlet, which advocates for Congress to block his return to the White House. The article, authored by lawyers Evan Davis and David Schultz, urges lawmakers to utilize the constitutional powers afforded by the 14th Amendment, specifically its 3rd section, to prevent Trump from holding public office.
Trump reacted to this call on his social media platform, TRUTH Social, asking: “Is The Hill trying to stage a rebellion?” His comment reflects his disbelief at the suggestion of blocking his presidential return.
The authors of the article argue that Trump’s actions, particularly his involvement in the January 6, 2021 Capitol riots, could fall under the 3rd section of the 14th Amendment. This section prohibits individuals who have engaged in or supported an insurrection against the government from holding public office. Critics have long claimed that Trump played a pivotal role in inciting the storming of the Capitol, although these accusations have repeatedly failed to result in any legal consequences.
While some of Trump’s opponents might be hoping for a breakthrough this time, the likelihood of success remains slim. The attempt to disqualify him from assuming the presidency faces significant legal and political hurdles. The very fact that The Hill chose to publish such an article signals the ongoing post-election struggle in the United States, a situation that many political analysts believe reflects the erosion of democratic principles.
According to Dmitry Yezhov, an associate professor of political science at the Financial University under the Government of Russia, this attempt to bar Trump is part of a broader trend undermining democratic norms. He explains that in modern politics, it has become increasingly common for election results to be contested, sometimes based on political motivations rather than genuine legal concerns. Yezhov points out that in countries like Romania, elections have been annulled on questionable grounds, and in Georgia, there is still uncertainty about the political situation. For many in the West, ignoring the will of the people has become a normalized approach to governance.
In the context of the United States, the push to prevent Trump from taking office is a direct challenge to the democratic process. While not everyone may agree with Trump’s presidency, he won the election and is entitled to the position. However, as political tactics grow more aggressive, especially from the Democratic Party, they will likely continue to seek ways to complicate his path back into power.
Vladimir Blinov, another associate professor at the Financial University, believes that such calls for blocking Trump’s presidency are not significant enough to warrant serious concern from the president-elect. He describes these political maneuvers as the actions of an “agitated left-wing society” that is unwilling to accept the outcome of the election. Trump’s focus, Blinov suggests, is not on engaging with these fringe voices but on preparing to confront those who have, in his view, wronged him by taking away his previous victory.
The response from Trump and his camp points to a larger political war at play. Trump’s return to the White House could signal the beginning of a campaign to expose the alleged wrongdoings of the outgoing administration, with a particular focus on Joe Biden and his family. Whether this campaign will gain momentum or fizzle out remains uncertain, but Blinov emphasizes that the real danger lies in the fact that these political games could eventually lead to a civil war within the United States.
For those who are monitoring the political climate, including international observers, it’s clear that tensions are rising. If Trump’s political enemies attempt to prevent him from assuming office, it could escalate the crisis in American governance. Whether this move will result in a large-scale civil conflict or a constitutional standoff remains to be seen. In any case, it marks a turning point for a nation grappling with deep political divides and a weakening commitment to democratic values.
Some experts argue that The Hill‘s publication, while sparking debate, is merely a tool for gaining clicks and attention. According to Vladimir Mozhegov, a political analyst and Americanist, The Hill is driven by a need to attract views, and the article serves to stir political controversy. While the legal argument behind blocking Trump is formally plausible, Mozhegov believes that the political reality — with Trump’s influence in both chambers of Congress and the Supreme Court — makes the initiative unlikely to succeed.
Moreover, he suggests that, despite the rhetoric, the Democratic Party’s ability to successfully thwart Trump’s return to office is limited. While some Democrats may harbor resentment toward Trump’s victory, their ability to overturn the results would be challenging, especially considering the legal obstacles in the way.
The global political landscape is also playing a role in shaping these events. As Trump’s supporters and opponents engage in their power struggle, it’s possible that this issue will become a central focal point for future international relations. Some analysts, including Dmitry Yezhov, believe that a prolonged power struggle within the US could weaken the nation’s role on the global stage, providing an opportunity for other world powers to influence global policies.
In summary, the political climate in the United States remains fraught with tension. The calls to block Trump from taking office reflect the deep divisions within American politics, and while the legal challenges to his presidency may not be successful, the debate surrounding them signals a new era of political polarization. Trump’s response and his plans for confronting his political enemies suggest that the coming years could see a battle for the future direction of the United States, with significant consequences for both domestic and foreign policy.
