Written by

Democratic Bills Propose Revoking Secret Service Protection and Perks for Trump Upon Felony Conviction

Democratic Bills Threaten Trump's Post-Presidency Privileges Amid Felony Conviction

Former President Donald Trump faces the possibility of losing not only his Secret Service protection but also several customary perks of ex-presidents if two House Democrats' bills gain traction. With a felony conviction tarnishing his record, Trump's entitlement to post-White House benefits, such as an office space and staff, could be at stake under these proposed legislations.

The notion of Trump forfeiting his protective detail due to his conviction on 34 state counts of falsifying business records in New York has sparked controversy, with a Republican suggesting that Democrats harbor ill intentions towards Trump's safety. However, despite these bills being unlikely to advance in the near future, they have ignited fervent debate within the political arena.

Representative Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) spearheaded one of the bills, prompted by his oversight of the House committee investigating the January 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection. Thompson expressed disappointment in Trump's conduct as president, highlighting the jeopardy he allegedly put lives in. He questioned the rationale behind safeguarding a felon, underscoring the significance of accountability.

Thompson's bill, introduced in April, proposes ceasing Secret Service protection for a protectee upon sentencing for a state or federal crime carrying a minimum one-year prison term, while leaving Trump's other post-presidency privileges intact.

In contrast, Representative Laura Sanchez (D-Calif.) introduced the "No Glory for Hate Act," which takes a stricter stance. The bill aims to deny customary post-presidency perks, except Secret Service protection, to presidents impeached twice or convicted of a state or federal crime related to their official capacity. It also prohibits the use of federal funds to commemorate or name federal properties after such individuals, including barring burial in Arlington National Cemetery.

Sanchez emphasized that Trump's felony conviction underscores the rationale behind taxpayers not financing tributes to him. These bills represent a significant effort to hold accountable those who wielded executive power and subsequently faced legal repercussions, challenging the norms surrounding post-presidency benefits.

After the January 6 attack on the Capitol, I introduced this bill as a response to the ongoing threat Donald Trump poses to our democracy," she stated. "His increasingly hostile behavior and divisive rhetoric make it clear that he does not belong in the White House, nor does he warrant monuments erected in his honor.

While the prospects for either bill advancing are dim with Republican control of at least one chamber of Congress, the mere suggestion of stripping Trump of his post-presidency Secret Service protection prompted a House GOP member to accuse Democrats of effectively endorsing violence against Trump.

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) criticized the notion, stating on right-wing news outlet Newsmax that proposing such legislation amounts to advocating for Trump's exposure to physical harm, even potential assassination. "It's outrageous that we're even discussing this," Biggs remarked.

When asked whether he intends to reintroduce his bill should Democrats secure control of the House in the November elections, Rep. Bennie Thompson was cautious. "We'll see how it goes this time. Who knows? Stranger things have happened," he remarked. "It's an idea worth considering. The feedback I've received suggests it has merit. Why should we shield a felon?

In conclusion, the debate surrounding the proposed bills targeting Donald Trump's post-presidency privileges underscores the deep divisions within American politics. While Democrats argue for accountability and the protection of democratic norms, Republicans decry what they perceive as an attempt to endanger Trump's safety. With the fate of these bills uncertain in the current political landscape, the controversy surrounding Trump's potential loss of Secret Service protection highlights the ongoing polarization and contentiousness in American governance. As the discussion continues, it remains to be seen how the balance between accountability and security will be addressed in the post-Trump era.