A revived push to add Donald Trump’s face to Mount Rushmore has ignited heated debate, as lawmakers cite his legacy—but geologists and historians warn the monument is physically and symbolically closed.
At a Glance
- GOP lawmakers have introduced proposals to add Donald Trump to Mount Rushmore.
- The bill argues Trump’s popularity and legislative record merit national tribute.
- Experts say the granite structure is already geologically unstable and cannot support further carving.
- The National Park Service and former site superintendent oppose any modifications.
- Historians argue the monument was intended as a completed symbol of America’s first 150 years.
Political Push Meets Geological Reality
Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna formally introduced legislation urging the Interior Secretary to plan Trump’s addition to the iconic national monument. Tennessee Rep. Andy Ogles echoed the call in a July 4 letter emphasizing Trump’s legislative accomplishments—including the “One Big Beautiful Bill.”
But former Mount Rushmore superintendent Dan Wenk and engineers from RESPEC have issued stern warnings: the rock face is geologically maxed out. According to a People Magazine report, any additional carving could destabilize the monument and threaten the integrity of the existing sculptures.
Constitutional and Cultural Hurdles
Even beyond geological concerns, adding a living president’s image would require full congressional approval and National Park Service authorization. Historians argue that Mount Rushmore was explicitly designed to represent America’s first 150 years of history, with Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Lincoln symbolizing foundational eras.
Critics view this movement as part of a larger campaign to institutionalize Trump-era politics, including attempts to place his image on currency and rename airports. They warn that turning Mount Rushmore into a living political tribute could erode its unifying national symbolism.
Engineering, Memory, and the Myth of Expansion
Geologists consulted by the National Park Service agree: there is no suitable granite left for carving, and any new work risks causing irreversible damage. Former site officials have likened such a modification to painting new figures onto da Vinci’s Last Supper.
Supporters, however, argue Trump’s enduring popularity and disruptive leadership justify permanent tribute—contending that the monument should evolve to reflect new chapters in American identity.
For now, the idea remains political spectacle. But as physical and symbolic barriers mount, Trump’s Mount Rushmore bid may be less about stone—and more about shaping the nation’s narrative in concrete ways.
