This would probably entail the destruction of the USA itself.
Like Hobbes says, changing from one form of State to the next means the destruction of the previous State.
Like Bodin says, to make a subject equal with the Sovereignty itself means its destruction.
Sure, the old symbols and so on could be used, but that's no different than Putin using symbols of both Tsarist Russia and the Soviets. – Certain successor states use old symbols to gain obedience of the subjects and a seeming continuation of government and stability, in the way heirs adopt the name of Casear (a man of pre-eminence) to further their own majesty… as various successive states also took to being another Rome.
This is no different than the wolf from Little Red Riding Hood eating the grandmother & putting on her clothes.
The US Constitution sets term limits on the President by the 22nd Amendment.
& no noble titles>Article I, Section 9, Clause 8: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
So it is doubtful this can be a de jure monarchy by institution, but de facto.
I'm not too well versed in this dilemma tbh.
Whether Trump gains this by right of conquest or not, Bodin would deem it to be a lordly monarchy (by right of conquest) or an illegitimate seizure of power as a tyrannical monarchy.
…Executions, banishments, confiscations, and other deeds of violence usually mark a transition of State
Chuck Schumer says he's afraid for the future of democracy.Post too long. Click here to view the full text.