logo
Trump says he's 'not joking' about a possible 3rd term. The Constitution bars it, scholars say

Trump says he's 'not joking' about a possible 3rd term. The Constitution bars it, scholars say

Yahoo31-03-2025
President Donald Trump has often mused, even joked, about seeking a third term, but over the weekend he made his strongest and most serious comments yet on a move that constitutional scholars ABC News spoke with call virtually impossible.
"I'm not joking," he told NBC News "Meet the Press" moderator Kristen Welker in a phone interview on Sunday, before adding it was "far too early to think about it."
"There are methods which you could do it," Trump said, including a scenario in which Vice President JD Vance ran at the top of the 2028 ticket with Trump as his running mate, only for Trump to assume the Oval Office after the election.
MORE: Is the Trump administration's conflict with judges a constitutional crisis? What to know
Legal and election experts told ABC News any attempt to win another four years as president would be an unprecedented breach of the Constitution.
"Trump may not want to rule out a third term but the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution does," said David Schultz, a professor at Hamline University and an expert in constitutional law.
The amendment states, in part: "No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice."
It was ratified in 1951, years after President Franklin D. Roosevelt broke with the two-term tradition set by George Washington and secured a third term as World War II was breaking out.
"It would be completely unprecedented for a president to openly defy the dictates of the 22nd Amendment and, even more so, to attempt to run or serve again as president," said Michael Gerhardt, a constitutional expert at the University of North Carolina.
"The threats and insinuations no doubt thrill his base, but there is no constitutional basis for the current president to try to serve as president after two elected terms," Gerhardt said.
The only way legal way for Trump to be able to run for a third term, experts said, would be to amend the Constitution -- an incredibly unlikely outcome as it would take two-thirds of both the House and Senate, or two-thirds of the states agreeing to call a constitutional convention. Then, any change would require three-fourths of the states to sign on for ratification.
"This statement by Trump was brilliant in terms of capturing and diverting attention," said Schultz. "His supporters love it and his detractors will rage over it. In the process, no one will talk about the price of eggs, tariffs and a shaky stock market."
As for Trump's claim that one of the "methods" could be to run as Vance's vice president and then be passed the baton, experts point to the 12th Amendment from 1804 as a barrier.
"The 12th Amendment states that anyone who is ineligible to be president is also deemed to be illegible to serve as vice president," said Barry Burden, the director of the Elections Research Center at University of Wisconsin-Madison. "This means that Trump could not serve as vice president, which is the post he would need for the Vance scheme to be executed."
Steve Bannon, a fierce Trump ally, has also floated what he's called alternatives to allow Trump to run in 2028.
Bannon, in remarks at the New York Young Republican Club gala in December, has argued that he could run again as Trump's two terms in office were not consecutive.
"Since it doesn't actually say consecutive, I don't know, maybe we do it again in '28? Are you guys down for that? Trump '28?" Bannon said.
Schultz said that argument doesn't have a sound legal basis.
"The overall limit of serving as president for ten years is both textual proof on the bar to run for a third term and an indication of the intent of the congressional drafters that they did not want anyone serving for more than two terms," Schultz said.
He added that measure "was put into place to allow for a situation where a president dies more than halfway into a term and the vice president succeeds that person. The Constitution thereby allows for the vice president to serve out the remaining term and then serve two more terms, for a total of ten years."
Trump has already tested the bounds of the Constitution governing presidential power several times in the first months of his second term.
Several Democrats viewed his comments on Sunday as another escalation against the rule of law. Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin wrote on X: "This is what dictators do."
In the past, Republicans have largely played off Trump's musings about a third term as a joke intended to rile his opposition. But just days after his inauguration, Republican hardliner Rep. Andy Ogles introduced a resolution calling for the extension of presidential term limits to allow Trump to seek another four years in the White House.
MORE: No, Trump can't cancel the 2028 election. But he could still weaken democracy.
"A crisis could arise if Trump runs for president or vice president in 2028," Burden said. "The Constitution prohibits serving in office but not running for office. If Republicans nominated him, they would be betting that they can violate the Constitution and somehow allow him to serve if he wins."
If Trump attempted to run, it would be up to election officials and then ultimately the courts to decide. This played out in the 2024 campaign, when several states challenged his eligibility to seek the Republican presidential nomination under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment due to his actions around the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. The legal battle went to the Supreme Court, which ruled in Trump's favor.
"If an ineligible person such as Trump is permitted to run knowing that he is not eligible to serve, it is a dangerous collision course in which the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law would be seriously tested," Burden said.
James Sample, a constitutional law expert at Hofstra University, said Trump would lose in court should he attempt to run again.
"Most of the Constitution is written in broad, textured, difficult to define terms. What is a speedy trial? What is cruel and unusual punishment? What is equal protection? How much process is due process? The 22nd Amendment, however, is black and white," Sample said.
"But if you can succeed in turning questions that are that clear-cut into debates, then the overall goal of undermining the Constitution and undermining the rule of law and maximizing executive power is served even if you lose the particular battle," he continued. "This particular battle is not a winnable battle. He is not going to serve a third term, but merely by framing this as a debate, he will succeed in further eroding respect for the Constitution."
Trump says he's 'not joking' about a possible 3rd term. The Constitution bars it, scholars say originally appeared on abcnews.go.com
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US sanctions more ICC judges, prosecutors for probes into alleged American, Israeli war crimes
US sanctions more ICC judges, prosecutors for probes into alleged American, Israeli war crimes

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

US sanctions more ICC judges, prosecutors for probes into alleged American, Israeli war crimes

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is ramping up pressure on the International Criminal Court for pursuing investigations into U.S. and Israeli officials for alleged war crimes. The State Department on Wednesday announced new sanctions on four ICC officials, including two judges and two prosecutors, who it said had been instrumental in efforts to prosecute Americans and Israelis. As a result of the sanctions, any assets the targets hold in U.S. jurisdictions are frozen. The sanctions are just the latest in a series of steps the administration has taken against The Hague-based court, the world's first international war crimes tribunal. The U.S. has already imposed penalties on the ICC's former chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, who stepped aside in May pending an investigation into alleged sexual misconduct, and four other tribunal judges. In a statement, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he had taken action against ICC judges Kimberly Proust of Canada and Nicolas Guillou of France and prosecutors Nazhat Shameem Khan of Fiji and Mame Mandiaye Niang of Senegal. 'These individuals are foreign persons who directly engaged in efforts by the International Criminal Court to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute nationals of the United States or Israel, without the consent of either nation,' Rubio said. He added that the administration would continue 'to take whatever actions we deem necessary to protect our troops, our sovereignty, and our allies from the ICC's illegitimate and baseless actions.' In a separate statement, the State Department said Prost was hit for ruling to authorize an ICC investigation into U.S. personnel in Afghanistan, which was later dropped. Guillou was sanctioned for ruling to authorize the ICC's issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant related to Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza. Khan and Niang were penalized for continuing Karim Khan's investigation into Israel's actions in Gaza, including upholding the ICC's arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, according to the statement. Wednesday's move carries on a history of Trump administration actions against the ICC, of which the U.S. is not a member, dating back to his first term in office. During Trump's first term, the U.S. hit the ICC with sanctions, but those were rescinded by President Joe Biden's administration in early 2021.

Democrats facing crisis as more than 2M voters leave party in four years: analysis
Democrats facing crisis as more than 2M voters leave party in four years: analysis

New York Post

time19 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Democrats facing crisis as more than 2M voters leave party in four years: analysis

The Democratic Party is bleeding registered voters, suffering a 4.5 million swing against it that could take years to recover from, according to a new report. Between the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections, Democrats lost about 2.1 million voters across the 30 states that track registration by political party, according to a New York Times analysis of data gathered by the L2 tracking firm. Over the same period, the Republican Party gained 2.4 million registered voters. Officially, there are still more registered Democrats than Republicans nationwide, but that number is incomplete because blue states like California and New York allow voters to register by party — as does the District of Columbia — while reliably red states like Texas, Missouri and Ohio do not. Most alarmingly for Democrats, the decline is nationwide, with the US seeing more new voters registering with the GOP in 2024 for the first time in six years. Democrats also saw their registered voter advantage dwindle in four 2024 battleground states — Arizona, Nevada, North Carolina and Pennsylvania — all of which President Trump carried this past Nov. 5. Democrats lost about 2.1 million registered voters in the 30 states that track registration by political party. AP Michael Pruser, who tracks voter registration closely as the director of data science for Decision Desk HQ, warned that the numbers not only help explain Trump's victory last year — in which he became the first Republican presidential candidate to win the popular vote in 20 years — but also forecast significant headwinds for Democrats in next year's midterm elections as well as the 2028 presidential vote. 'I don't want to say, 'The death cycle of the Democratic Party,'' Pruser told the Times, 'but there seems to be no end to this.' 'There is no silver lining or cavalry coming across the hill. This is month after month, year after year,' he added. In North Carolina, Democrats lost 115,523 voters between the 2020 and 2024 election, with Republicans gaining more than 140,000 members and erasing the Dems' registration advantage, according to the L2 data. More new voters registered to be Republican than Democrat last year, the first time since 2018. Michael Nagle Democrats suffered similar losses in Arizona and Pennsylvania, while in Nevada — a state whose politics were long dominated by the Las Vegas-based Culinary Workers Union — the share of registered Democrats suffered the second-steepest plunge of those states measured between 2020 and 2024. (Only deep-red West Virginia saw more precipitous losses.). Even Democratic bastions like New York and California were not safe from voter erosion, with Dems losing 305,922 registered voters in the Empire State in between the two elections. In California, Democrats lost 680,556 voters between 2020 and 2024. All in all, Democrats went from enjoying an advantage of nearly 11 percentage points over Republicans in registered voter numbers in 2020 to just over six percentage points across the 30 states and DC in 2024, the Times found. Experts believe that the fall of new Democratic registrations can be linked to the growing number of voters choosing to be independents or unaffiliated, a trend that is sapping both parties' rolls. In 2018, more than one-third (34%) of new voter registrations nationwide were Democrats, while registered Republicans made up just 20% of new voters. As of last year, however, Republicans had erased that gap, with party supporters making up 29% of new voters, while Democrats made up 26% of new voters.

Stephen Miller blasts ‘stupid white hippies' protesting DC crackdown
Stephen Miller blasts ‘stupid white hippies' protesting DC crackdown

The Hill

time19 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Stephen Miller blasts ‘stupid white hippies' protesting DC crackdown

Deputy White House chief of staff Stephen Miller on Wednesday railed against what he called 'stupid white hippies' who were protesting the federal crackdown on crime in the nation's capital and argued they did not represent the citizens of Washington, D.C. Miller, Vice President Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth visited Union Station on Wednesday, where National Guard troops have been stationed outside for days in a show of force near the transportation hub. 'We are not going to let the communists destroy a great American city, let alone the nation's capital,' Miller told the crowd near Shake Shack inside Union Station. 'And let's just also address another thing. All these demonstrators you've seen out here in recent days, all these elderly white hippies, they're not part of the city and never have been. And by the way, most of the citizens who live in Washington, D.C., are Black.' 'So we're going to ignore these stupid white hippies that all need to go home and take a nap because they're all over 90 years old,' he added. 'And we're going to get back to the business of protecting the American people and the citizens of Washington, D.C.' The Trump administration earlier this month began surging federal law enforcement across parts of the district to crack down on what the White House said was an unacceptable level of crime, despite statistics showing violent crime has declined in the city. Last week, Trump took federal control of the Metropolitan Police Department and deployed hundreds of National Guard troops across the city to further the crack down on crime. The White House has said officers across the district have made more than 550 arrests since the surge in federal resources began on Aug. 7. But local residents have largely expressed disapproval with the aggressive moves from the federal government. A Washington Post-Schar School poll of 604 D.C. residents published Wednesday found 65 percent do not think Trump's actions will make the city safer. Roughly 80 percent of residents said they opposed Trump's executive order to federalize the city's police department.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store