Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Is Pritzker Right? Is It Time To Invoke the 25th Amendment Against Trump?

Opinion

Is Pritzker Right? Is It Time To Invoke the 25th Amendment Against Trump?

Illinois Governor JB Pritzker Vs. US President Donald Trump

AI generated picture

CHICAGO — Illinois Governor JB Pritzker ignited a wave of political reaction this week after publicly calling for the invocation of the 25th Amendment to remove President Donald Trump from office, citing concerns over his mental fitness and inflammatory rhetoric targeting American cities.

Pitzker condemned Trump’s recent speech at Quantico, Virginia, where the president suggested using cities like Chicago as “training grounds for our military” and threatened action against “the enemy within.”


“It appears that Donald Trump not only has dementia set in, but he’s copying tactics of [Russian President] Vladimir Putin,” Pritzker said. “Sending troops into cities, thinking that that’s some sort of proving ground for war, or that indeed there’s some sort of internal war going on in the United States, is just, frankly, inane, and I’m concerned for his health. There is something genuinely wrong with this man, and the 25th Amendment ought to be invoked”.

By any measure of democratic stability, the recent rhetoric and behavior of President Donald Trump should alarm every American. When a sitting president refers to U.S. cities as “training grounds for our military,” we are no longer debating policy—we are confronting a crisis of fitness. Governor Pritzker’s bold call to invoke the 25th Amendment is not only justified, it’s overdue.

Other prominent voices echoed the governor’s remarks. Representative Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) posted a blunt message on social media: “25TH AMENDMENT!” following Trump’s Quantico address.

Former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich also weighed in, writing in a Tuesday editorial that Trump is “showing growing signs of dementia” and is “increasingly unhinged.” Reich cited Trump’s promotion of an AI-generated video about magical healing beds and his decision to deploy troops to Portland based on outdated footage from Fox News. “He’s 79 years old with a family history of dementia. He could well be going nuts,” Reich warned.

This is not political theater. It is a constitutional safeguard. The 25th Amendment exists precisely for moments like this—when the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office. It is not a partisan tool, but a mechanism to protect the republic from instability, erratic behavior, and cognitive decline that threatens national security.

Critics will argue that invoking the 25th Amendment is an extreme measure. But what is more extreme—removing a president who threatens cities with military force, or allowing such threats to go unchecked? What is more dangerous—questioning a leader’s fitness, or ignoring clear signs of cognitive decline and erratic behavior?

Pritzker’s leadership in this moment is both courageous and necessary. He is not merely defending Illinois; he is defending the integrity of American democracy. His invocation of the 25th Amendment is a call to action for Cabinet members, lawmakers, and civic leaders to prioritize the country’s well-being over political loyalty.

This is not about ideology. It is about stability, accountability, and the rule of law. The president’s words and actions have consequences. They embolden extremists, undermine public trust, and destabilize communities already grappling with economic and social challenges. When Trump speaks of “the enemy within,” he is not uniting the country—he is sowing division and fear.

Governor Pritzker’s stance reminds us that leadership is not about silence or calculation. It is about moral clarity. It is about recognizing when the line between political disagreement and constitutional crisis has been crossed. That line is behind us.

The 25th Amendment is not a relic of the past. It is a living provision, designed to protect the nation from precisely this kind of danger. It is time for those in power to heed Pritzker’s call. The stakes are too high for hesitation. America deserves a president who governs with reason, not rage; with clarity, not confusion.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network.


Read More

The White House
The white house with green lawn and trees
Photo by Josh on Unsplash

The Politics of Gratitude: Why Washington Punishes the Loyalty It Cannot Price

On a Sunday night in August, Senator Jon Ossoff told a campaign rally in Atlanta that President Trump would rather build his ballroom and “travel with Natalie” than do his job. He never used her last name. He did not need to. Natalie Harp, the White House aide known to colleagues as Trump’s “human printer” for trailing him with a portable printer and transcribing his social-media dictation, had become a punchline before most Americans knew who she was.

The backlash arrived within hours. White House officials accused Ossoff of insinuating an affair; Republican Rep. Brandon Gill noted that Harp survived bone cancer only because the Right to Try Act, which Trump signed in 2018, let her seek an experimental treatment outside the normal approval process, and dismissed any other reading of the moment as unfair. Weeks earlier, Harp had been at the center of a far more consequential story: in July, she was one of a handful of aides, alongside the defense secretary and two senior staffers, chosen to accompany Trump on a covert switch of aircraft as he left a security summit in Turkey after officials detected a credible Iranian threat, while most of the traveling delegation stayed behind on a decoy plane. That is the real proximity Ossoff's line was needling. Then came a detail that complicated the story further: Trump had personally given Harp and several other aides cash gifts of $45,000 apiece, which a former federal ethics official called troublesome, since money on that scale can leave a recipient feeling indebted to whoever signs the check.

Keep ReadingShow less
A map labeling Lake Ontario as "Lake America" is displayed behind U.S. President Donald Trump.

A map labeling Lake Ontario as "Lake America" is displayed as U.S. President Donald Trump signs an executive order during an event in the Oval Office of the White House on August 27, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Cartography of Convenience: Why Rushed Renaming Erodes Public Trust

In tough economic times, governments often reach for the easiest kind of progress: a new name on an old sign. Wage stagnation, inflation, crumbling roads, and rising rents are hard problems that take years and real money to fix. Renaming a street, a lake, or a strait is not. It costs a fraction as much and lets officials point to something they “did.” A new name never fixes a pothole or lowers a grocery bill. This year offered an unusually rich catalogue of the habit, reaching from a city council in Texas to a wartime waterway in the Persian Gulf.

A Concept Borrowed From the Cremation Ground

Indian philosophy has an old idea called shmashana vairagya, describing the sudden clarity a person feels standing at a cremation ground, when ordinary ambitions look small. The feeling fades once the mourner goes home. Public policy has its own version of this cycle. In the raw hours after a tragedy, a scandal, or a surge of national feeling, officials decide, sometimes within a single social media post, what belongs on a map or a sign forever. The emotion passes in hours. The bill, when there is one, stays for years.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

U.S. President Donald Trump on February 6, 2026.

(Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

A Demagogue in the White House: Will the Guardrails Hold?

A demagogue does not seize all power at once. He takes it piece by piece.

In Trump’s second administration, those pieces accumulated in plain sight. The president generated so much disruption and noise that Americans struggled to keep pace. Each new controversy displaced the last, obscuring a more consequential story: the steady accumulation of presidential power.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner at the White House.

Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner in the East Room of the White House on September 24, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

When Leaders Disagree, Ceremony Plays an Important Role

When Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived at the White House on 24 September, the U.S. welcomed him with an elaborate display of ceremony. The Army Herald Trumpets sounded a fanfare, the Chinese and American national anthems were played, and the Old Guard Fife and Drum Corps performed. A military review was followed by a flyover involving a B-2 bomber and four F-22 fighter jets, according to the White House. It was an extraordinary production for two countries that still disagree on some of the most important issues in international politics.

Talks between President Donald Trump and Xi touched on trade, artificial intelligence and Taiwan. The visit was marked by warm words and some signs of cooperation, but it did not erase the fundamental competition between the United States and China. So why was all this ceremony staged? It is tempting to dismiss political pomp as mere window dressing: an expensive historical relic surrounding the serious business taking place behind closed doors. As a music historian, however, I think this misunderstands what ceremony does. Ceremony can become particularly valuable when words alone are not enough.

Keep ReadingShow less