Former President Donald Trump, who has faced impeachment twice before, is once again at the center of discussion regarding potential impeachment proceedings. His first impeachment in 2019 followed allegations that he pressured Ukraine to produce damaging information about then-presidential candidate Joe Biden. The second, in 2021, stemmed from his role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, culminating in the January 6 Capitol riot.
Recent assessments by political commentators suggest that actions taken during what would be considered a hypothetical second Trump administration could meet or surpass the severity of the offenses prompting his earlier impeachments. These include alleged corrupt profiteering, the deployment of the National Guard in U.S. cities, the use of federal immigration agencies as enforcement tools against political opponents, attempts to seize congressional control over budgetary matters, abuse of the presidential pardon power, political retaliation targeting law firms and universities, and sustained attacks on press freedom.
While none of these individual actions mirror the singular gravity of the January 6 events, some observers characterize this pattern of conduct as an authoritarian challenge to constitutional norms. They suggest it amounts to a "whole-of-government effort" to undermine democratic processes, including efforts to subvert forthcoming midterm elections and limit governmental accountability.
Legal scholars invoke Federalist No. 65, which frames impeachment as addressing offenses that cause immediate injury to society and the constitutional order. From this perspective, the cumulative nature of Trump's conduct could constitute grounds for a third impeachment, irrespective of any singular act.
Despite this, Democratic leaders have expressed reluctance or ambivalence about pursuing new impeachment measures. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has neither confirmed nor dismissed the possibility. Former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who has been seen as a potential 2024 presidential candidate, openly opposes impeachment efforts, citing political futility and the potential for divisive partisan conflict. Similarly, Senator Tammy Duckworth has advocated for a focus on legislative work rather than impeachment proceedings.
Proponents of avoiding impeachment argue that Democrats should prioritize passing legislation aimed at addressing economic concerns and improving affordability. However, critics caution that under Trump’s continued influence, congressional cooperation may remain elusive. Rather than moderate his behavior, a lack of accountability could embolden further abuses of power. Some analysts warn that, facing political defeat, Trump might provoke international crises, such as escalating conflict with Iran, to rally support or distract from domestic challenges.
Supporters of a new impeachment urge that, even without a realistic chance of conviction in the Senate, the process serves as a critical political tool. It would publicize alleged misconduct, reinforce claims of presidential unfitness, and potentially expose broader criminal wrongdoing within the administration. Additionally, an impeachment inquiry could pressure the Republican Party to clarify its stance on Trump ahead of the next presidential election, forcing candidates to either distance themselves from or align more closely with the former president.
While acknowledging the political risks and inconvenience to Democratic leadership, advocates argue that impeachment remains the Constitution’s primary mechanism to check a president accused of lawlessness. They contend that failing to utilize this remedy risks allowing a sitting or former leader to undermine the rule of law and democratic institutions without effective recourse.