As President Donald Trump’s vision to join the iconic faces on Mount Rushmore gains traction among supporters, a fierce debate unfolds. The proposal, sparked by a 2020 rally, has ignited passion and controversy, raising questions about legacy, feasibility, and the sanctity of a national treasure. What hurdles stand in the way of this bold ambition?

Summary

• Trump’s desire to be carved into Mount Rushmore has strong conservative backing.
• Geological and structural issues make adding a new face nearly impossible.
• Robin Borglum Kennedy, sculptor’s granddaughter, opposes altering the monument.
• Experts compare adding a face to defacing a masterpiece like the Last Supper.
• South Dakota’s proposed National Garden of American Heroes faces Indigenous opposition.

Trump’s Vision Sparks Debate

President Trump’s aspiration to see his likeness on Mount Rushmore has resonated deeply with his base, who view his leadership as transformative. The idea gained momentum after a 2020 rally at the monument, where then-Gov. Kristi Noem gifted Trump a $1,100 bust featuring his face alongside Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt, and Lincoln. 

“This presidency is historic,” said Fox News host Will Cain, praising Trump’s global impact, from NATO reforms to peace efforts in Ukraine. “Is it not on the level of Mount Rushmore?”

Geological and Artistic Barriers

Despite the enthusiasm, experts warn that carving a new face is fraught with challenges. The National Park Service, after studies with engineering firms, declared no secure surfaces remain on the rock face. Geologists highlight the mountain’s fragile granite, mixed with unstable pegmatite and schist, which forced sculptor Gutzon Borglum to abandon plans for torsos and relocate one face during construction. 

“If you remove material, you could be removing support.It would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to carve an additional face,” said geologist Nelson, noting risks to existing carvings, like Lincoln’s nose.

Opposition from Legacy Guardians

Robin Borglum Kennedy, granddaughter of Gutzon Borglum, firmly opposes changes. 

“It was conceived as a tribute to the ideals of America, not to any one man,” she told the New York Times. 

Former superintendent Dan Wenk echoed this, stating, “You wouldn’t add another face to Borglum’s Mount Rushmore just like you wouldn’t add one to da Vinci’s ‘Last Supper.’” 

These voices underscore the monument’s status as a completed work of art.

Alternative Proposals and Tensions

While carving Trump’s face seems improbable, South Dakota officials propose a National Garden of American Heroes nearby, backed by a $40 million House allocation and 40 acres donated by a mining company. \However, Indigenous groups, who view the Black Hills as sacred, strongly oppose the project, citing historical land disputes.

Conclusion

Trump’s Mount Rushmore dream embodies his larger-than-life persona, but geological, artistic, and cultural hurdles make it a long shot. As conservatives rally behind his legacy, the debate highlights the tension between honoring history and preserving sacred ground.