While working in Washington, D.C. — the nexus of U.S. politics and global diplomacy — I saw firsthand that the peaceful transfer of presidential power is more than a ceremonial gesture or democratic ideal; it’s foundational to our national security, public health, and global stability.

I served at the White House in the United States Digital Service (USDS) from 2015 to 2018, bridging two administrations. Ahead of the 2016 election, our teams prepared exhaustive briefings for both potential successors: Hillary Clinton and, against most predictions, Donald Trump. When Trump won the electoral vote, we put aside personal politics and focused on an orderly transition.Amid the incendiary rhetoric of the election, I, like many others, drew firm red lines — principles we wouldn’t compromise or policies we couldn’t, in good conscience, support, like or targeted marginalized communities. These principles set a clear threshold, defining the point at which many of us could no longer remain in the Trump administration. At the same time, we recognized that our commitment to the democratic process was essential to maintaining vital government stability. The work we and countless dedicated career government professionals had devoted hours to was too important to let falter in the transition.During the 2016 Obama-to-Trump transition, our goal was to equip the incoming administration to continue critical digital initiatives serving all Americans. Unfortunately, Trump’s team disregarded the norms of transition — a stark departure from established protocols — jeopardizing the continuity of essential government services. In a forewarning for the next transition, the incoming Trump team eschewed most efforts to ensure continuity and seemed more focused on dismantling government than maintaining its stability. They failed to approach the transition process with the necessary seriousness and professionalism — going as far as firing their entire transition staff at the 11th hour, “” without regard and . By all accounts circulating through the White House at the time, the members of the incoming Trump transition team were .In 2016, the transition reflected diligence from the outgoing Obama administration; politics got put aside, and, with a sense of constitutional duty, everyone focused on a seamless handoff essential to maintaining stability. By contrast, in 2020, the outgoing Trump administration obstructed nearly every attempt at a peaceful transfer of power to the Biden administration. As a member of the Department of Defense Review Team for the Biden-Harris transition, I experienced firsthand the canceled meetings, withheld data, and systematic refusals that risked national security and public health. This wasn’t just a break from norms or an inconvenience. It was a deliberate gamble with the nation’s safety at a critical juncture. These obstructions, if allowed to repeat, would endanger not just the next administration but the resilience of democracy itself.The differences between these two transitions were striking and deeply concerning. The outgoing Trump administration’s efforts to obstruct the 2020 election outcome and cling to power at all costs were reckless and overtly anti-democratic. These actions didn’t begin with a or a ; they were multifaceted and began long before, infiltrating vital government agencies through subversive maneuvers by partisan officials working behind closed doors — putting loyalty to Trump above the integrity of the presidential transition process.

Consequences of Obstruction

The obstructions by the outgoing Trump administration had severe impacts. The first significant roadblock came when the administrator of the General Services Administration (GSA), , blocking transition teams’ access to resources and delaying the transition from commencing essential work. The obstruction didn’t end there.One of our top priorities during the 2020 transition was addressing the country’s most urgent risk: the COVID-19 pandemic. The outgoing administration was reluctant to cooperate on this. We encountered , impairing our ability to prepare an effective vaccine distribution strategy and potentially costing lives. Our technical assessment of Operation Warp Speed — the joint initiative to accelerate vaccine distribution between the Department of Defense and the Department of Health and Human Services — was thwarted by canceled briefings, withheld information, and more delays.Early one morning, we learned that acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller had ordered a Pentagon-wide halt to briefings for the incoming administration. The with our transition team, without explanation. This sudden and unprecedented action from a top Pentagon official undermined our ability to ensure the incoming administration was adequately prepared to assume control of crucial systems responsible for vaccine distribution. We had to continue our work without essential information and transparency during one of the most critical moments in a global health crisis.The transition period also saw one of U.S. history’s most significant cyber-espionage campaigns — the SolarWinds hack. The from the outgoing administration made it harder to properly prepare the incoming administration to assess and respond effectively to this serious cyber risk. Delays and refusals for information hindered the ability of various transition teams to evaluate the situation and adequately prepare the incoming administration to manage this threat.Despite these challenges, the nation was shielded from the worst potential outcomes because many members of the incoming Biden team had previously served in the Obama administration. Their allowed them to compensate for the lack of cooperation from the outgoing administration and navigate challenges more effectively than a less seasoned team might have. Without this experience, the consequences could have been catastrophic.

A Warning for 2028

Reflecting on these past transitions reveals troubling patterns. But here’s the critical point: the during the 2020 transition after Trump lost the election aren’t just historical footnotes; they’re likely harbingers of what’s to come in a future Trump administration if the same attitudes toward the democratic process persist.As we look ahead to the 2028 election cycle, the possibility of another Trump administration that may again disregard the norms of peaceful transition poses an even greater risk the second time around. This isn’t a distant concern; it’s a looming threat to the stability of essential government functions and our capacity to respond to crises. The to take transition preparation seriously in case he wins the election, once again putting the continuity of government operations at significant risk. The 2020–21 transition was anything but a peaceful transfer of power, and by most accounts, .The delays and obstruction in 2020 had real-world implications. The world hasn’t gotten any simpler since; global challenges like pandemics, climate change, and international conflicts require swift and coordinated responses that only a fully briefed and prepared administration can provide from day one.

Engineering Democracy

As a technologist and engineering leader, I’ve long kept political discourse separate from my professional life. However, the risks of repeating the events of 2020 are too significant to ignore. The obstructed Biden-Harris transition negatively impacted national security and . This isn’t about partisanship; it’s about preserving the mechanisms that keep our democracy functioning safely and serving the American public.In technology and business, we implement continuity planning to keep systems operational. Throughout my career, I’ve focused on building robust systems that withstand challenges and adapt to change. Our democracy is one such system — intricate, interdependent, and in need of vigilant upkeep. are a critical form of continuity planning on a national scale, with far more significant consequences. Transition teams ensure that critical functions — national security, foreign policy, public health — continue uninterrupted when new leadership takes over. When this work is hindered, the repercussions can be profound.We must recognize the importance of peaceful, orderly transitions and the severe dangers posed by those who act to destabilize and undermine them. Choosing isn’t about politics; it’s about safeguarding the stability, resilience, and integrity of essential government services that serve the American public. We were fortunate once; experienced officials mitigated the worst impacts of obstruction in 2020. Next time, we may not be so lucky.By electing leaders committed to peaceful transitions, we protect the integrity of the most vital structure we all rely on: our nation.