Scaros: Biden Is Violating Article IV of the Constitution - But Impeaching Him for It Would Be Foolish
The Biden administration’s irresponsibly lax security policy along our southern border is arguably a direct violation of the U.S. Constitution.
The operative word here is “arguably,” because proving it in a manner that would give rise to an impeachment is extremely unlikely and would probably only serve to boost Biden’s poll numbers.
The better alternative, therefore, is to beat him on Election Day 2024.
First, consider the language of Article IV, Section 4: “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.”
Next, consider the astronomical level of people crossing our southern border illegally every day, largely because of Biden’s milquetoast approach to border security. Granted, it’s not that Biden wants people to pour into the U.S. illegally — some bringing drugs and weapons, or even humans to be trafficked. It’s that preventing it doesn’t seem to be particularly high on his list of priorities.
And would-be PHIs (persons here illegally) are well aware of that. They know that Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, constantly spoke about building a wall and ending illegal entry and stay, but now there’s a meeker sheriff in town, and so now’s the time to pounce before another law-and-order president takes over.
The Biden administration’s lackluster efforts to curb transnational trespass have been so irresponsible that it is plausible to say it has not “protected each [state] against invasion.”
Some will argue that by “invasion,” the Constitution’s framers meant a declaration of war by another country. They’d also refer to the end of Section 4 calling upon the legislature (or the executive branch when the legislature cannot be convened) to protect against “domestic violence” to fortify their argument, because in that context, “domestic violence” surely doesn’t refer to violence in a private home, such as spousal or child abuse, but rather violence between or among citizens of the U.S.
However, such a literal reading would mean that the executive and/or legislative branches are empowered to protect states against military invasion and civil unrest, but that the federal government need not lift a finger when violence is committed in a U.S. state by foreigners (such as drug gangs) on Americans.
Examined further, it would also indicate that if the Mexican government sent an army to invade the U.S., our president certainly would have the right and obligation to defend our country, but wouldn’t have either the right or the obligation to do so if the invaders were Mexican revolutionaries not sent or sanctioned by Mexico’s government.
Moreover, the term “invasion” has a far broader meaning. A home invasion, for example, may involve a simple theft. A family is all watching a movie together in the living room while a burglar quietly breaks through a second-floor window, swipes the jewelry, and then scurries away. Not a hint of violence in that scenario, let alone use of military force.
Nonetheless, an attempt to impeach Biden for this offense would be foolish.
In the history of presidential impeachments, the House of Representatives has lost all four. That’s because, in each instance, it was based on partisan bias, though the impeaching side — and its supporters — was too blind to see it.
Presidential impeachments have a perfect track record of acquitting the president in question and increasing his popularity. They are vindications.
Biden could simply say “I’m trying my best” or “It’s not my fault. It’s because conditions have gotten worse in the countries from which illegal migrants come that there are more of them at our border. It would be the same no matter who’s president.”
Of course, whether or not he’d be correct is irrelevant. Convictions can’t happen on speculation. That’s why it was ridiculous, for instance, for the House to impeach Trump because of his phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Unless Trump said the words “If you don’t prosecute Biden I won’t give you the weapons Congress has authorized,” which he did not, he could not be convicted.
Similarly, unless Biden is caught on the phone or on video stating, “I want these people to come into the United States illegally,” he would not be convicted.
How, then, can we stop Biden from continuing to violate the Constitution by pursuing a toothless policy on the border? Easy: Remind everyone you know what he’s doing and why it’s unconstitutional.
And please don’t throw your arms in the air and say, “It won’t matter; Democrats cheat anyway.” If that’s what you’ve concluded, then remember what Trump often says: The more Republicans vote, the harder it is for Democrats to cheat.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.