When Donald Trump took the oath of office once again, it was the last time he’d be able to do so under the country’s constitution. But that hasn’t stopped his team from flirting with the idea of running again, writes Alex Hannaford – and the Democrats are nowhere to be seen...

Summary

Plans for a potential Trump third term are already being discussed, despite constitutional limitations.

Trump’s former strategist Steve Bannon has suggested they’re “working on it,” while Trump himself has made several hints about running again after 2028.

Some Republicans, like Congressman Andy Ogles, have proposed amending the 22nd Amendment to allow three terms.

Constitutional law professor Michele Goodwin warns that Trump’s administration has already shown “a display of lawlessness” with controversial executive orders and policies, while critics note Democratic opposition has been largely absent, allowing these discussions to gain traction.

  • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
    1·
    4 days ago

    The wording is specifically that you need to be qualified to hold the office of the president, not to run for the office.

    But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

    With qualifications to hold the office being:

    No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

    So the phrasing of the 22nd created an issue:

    No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once

    Elsewhere it talks about eligibility to hold office, but the 22nd only refers to election.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-22/overview-of-twenty-second-amendment-presidential-term-limits

    There’s also a similar issue with the speaker of the house, where eligibility isn’t as clearly defined as one might expect.

    While the intent of the law was clearly to codify the previous pattern of capping it at two terms (and being spiteful to FDR) it’s phrased with enough ambiguity that it’s clear how they’ll argue it.