A recent column on American Thinker by Kathleen Dynan argues that the Democratic Socialists’ 2026 campaign promises are not just misguided but legally impossible under the U.S. Constitution and existing federal statutes. The piece, published August 21, 2026, asserts that the party’s platform would require dismantling constitutional protections and violating laws that have stood for decades.
Dynan begins by attacking the very name of the party, stating that “Democrats support democracy, rule by the people, and socialists support Marxism, rule by the government.” She argues the two are incompatible, suggesting the party’s label is a misnomer that conceals its true intentions. The column goes further, labeling the party’s leadership as “Deceptive, Selfish, and Arrogant” — a rhetorical jab that sets the tone for the legal analysis that follows.
The constitutional objections
The central claim of the piece is that many Democratic Socialist policies would run afoul of specific constitutional provisions and federal laws. Dynan directs readers to several key documents: Article II and Article III of the Constitution, the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and USC 1231, which governs the detention and removal of aliens.
Article II lays out the powers of the presidency, while Article III establishes the judicial branch. The column suggests that the Democratic Socialists’ proposals would undermine the separation of powers and the independence of the courts. The Equal Protection Clause, meanwhile, would be violated by policies that treat citizens differently based on race or class, according to Dynan’s argument.
The Homeland Security Act and USC 1231 are invoked to challenge proposals that would alter immigration enforcement. Dynan argues that any plan to halt deportations or open borders would conflict with these statutes, making such promises “illegal under the Constitution and under bills passed by Congress and signed into law by presidents.”
The amendment process and the Bill of Rights
The column also highlights the difficulty of changing the Constitution itself. Dynan notes that in 250 years, only 33 amendments have been proposed and 27 ratified — the first ten of which are the Bill of Rights. She warns that the Democratic Socialists”would eliminate that pesky document, which is the foundation of America,” and that doing so would place the government in control of citizens’ lives.
This section of the piece is more rhetorical than legal, appealing to the reader’s reverence for the Bill of Rights and the amendment process’s deliberate pace. Dynan suggests that the Democratic Socialists’ vision would require sweeping changes that simply cannot be achieved through legitimate channels, leaving only extra-legal means — a claim that goes beyond the sourced material’s explicit text.
Context and reception
The column is part of a broader conservative critique of democratic socialism, which has gained traction in recent years as figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have risen to prominence. The piece includes an image of Ocasio-Cortez, implying that she embodies the movement’s goals, though the text itself does not name her or any specific policy proposals.
It’s important to note that this is an opinion piece, and its legal claims are contested. Constitutional scholars often debate the scope of the Equal Protection Clause, and immigration law is subject to ongoing litigation and policy changes. The column’s assertion that Democratic Socialist promises are “illegal” is an interpretation, not a settled legal ruling.
Dynan concludes by appealing to readers to support American Thinker, emphasizing the importance of free speech in a republic. The piece’s tone is urgent, framing the 2026 election as a critical moment for the nation’s constitutional order.
Readers should approach this column as a partisan analysis, not a neutral legal review. Its value lies in highlighting the constitutional hurdles that any radical policy agenda would face — a conversation that is likely to continue as the campaign season heats up.
Source: www.americanthinker.com — https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/08/what-a-government-under-the-democratic-socialists-would-look-like/