Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman is introducing a resolution to clarify that the 22nd Amendment — which sets presidential term limits — applies even if the terms are not consecutive.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
They have to get it passed - I'm only on day two of hearing local MAGA talking about trump being "entitled" to two consecutive terms but they are adamant & my gut tells me they're not an aberration. I've no doubt repubs will support trump in discarding the 22nd Amendment. None whatsoever.
BFD it is not Trump we need to worry about. He is a tool. I seriously doubt a man of his age who has lived as hard as he has will be here in 4 years. He will be propped up in the few imaged we see of him by 2028 where they will hold a cracker jack election for his successor.
Isn't it a little too late? Removing Democratic candor should have been one of Biden's priorities. The country was not ready for such an assault. And yet it was announced.
Nope, that still takes an amendment, which means 2/3 of the House, 2/3 of the Senate, *and* 3/4 of the state legislatures have to agree to it. There's a reason there have only been 17 amendments passed since 1791, and one of those was to remove another.
The 22nd Amendment states no president can be “elected” to more than two terms. It does not explicitly say no president can “serve” more than two terms. What makes us think Trump plans to be “elected” to a 3rd term? That is the loophole I fear he will try.
And he FAILED. Everyone's acting like this schmuck is some kind of Machiavellian genius, not a multiply-failed businessman who was rescued from poverty by NBC.
Well, the simplest loophole I can find is that he could run for VP in 2028, they could win, and the winner could resign or die after inauguration, leaving Trump as President.
You may say "but the 12th Amendment would bar him from running for VP." But would it? It says that the VP has to be "constitutionally eligible *to the office*." This means being a native born citizen over 35, but does it also mean not having been elected twice? Room for argument.
But getting back to basics, what is the legal effect of the 22nd saying he can't "be elected" a third time? Does it mean that his electors can't run? That states can't put him on the ballot? That his electors can't vote for him? Or that the VP can't certify his votes? And .. what if they do? Hmm?
It means he can't be on the ballot, as he does not fit the qualifications of the office - same reason a teenage pop star, no matter how popular, can't be on there because they're under 35.
It also states no more than 10 years; so that would preclude him running again. the biggest of my many fears is that they wait until half way through this term, have trump resign, and that sets us up to suffer through 2 additional full terms of Vance. And Vance might be even worse than trump.
This isn’t a smart move. By introducing this resolution, Rep. Goldman is essentially acknowledging that the 22nd Amendment isn’t clear enough, which could create the very loophole Trump needs. When this fails (and it will), it may backfire by strengthening Trump’s argument. #22ndAmendment
Sorry but engaging in this is a bad idea because it lends credence to the idea that the 22nd amendment is in any way unclear on this point, which it most certainly is not. This is the relevant language "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice....."
Comments
I can barely take 4 more years, let alone 8!
"No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice..."
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/full-text