Unless he first succeeds to the office with no more than 2 years left. That makes a theoretical maximum of 10 years in office (barring a scenario of coming back as VP and re-succeeding).
For political background, the term limit amendment was passed pretty quickly in the late '40’s, during a rare (for then) period of Republican control of both houses and most state legislatures. A cynic could say they took advantage of a window of opportunity to spite a dead man. I believe there were some pangs of regret that they had kept Eisenhower, a Republican, from likely re-election in 1960.
Philosophically, I’m opposed to term limits. I believe the people should have the right to pick whoever we want. We get a chance to “limit somebody’s term” every few years if we think we need to. Also, a lame-duck President needs to have more political leverage. Reasonable people can and do disagree about that, though.
We also had a long, detailed, law-based discussion about this in the Clinton’s third term thread.
The short answer is President Clinton cannot become President again. The Constitution states that someone ineligible to be president cannot be elected to Vice President, and that Congress may, by law, designate the succession after the Vice President. Congress has made such a law, 3 U.S.C. Sec. 19. That statute provides that the order of succession is Speaker of the House, President pro tem of the Senate, Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense, Attorney General, Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Secretary of Transportation, Secretary of Energy, Secretary of Education, Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
Subsection (e) of that statue provides that the the succession provisions “shall apply only to such officers as are eligible to the office of President under the Constitution.” Accordingly, even if President Clinton were appointed to a cabinet office, he would be ineligible to succeed to the presidency.
[Note: There is a tiny bit of wiggle room if you look at the language of the statue and constitutional amendments, some of which refer to whether someone is “eligible to the office of President,” and some of which refer to being eligible to be “elected” President. It is unlikely that the courts would ultimately interpret these language differences to allow any two-term president to serve again in any of the extremely unusual circumstances in which he might be called upon to do so.]
Agreed, however Clinton is eligible to be President (see Article II). He just can’t be elected President.
There is not a tiny bit of wiggle room. The 22nd Amendment clearly deals with being elected to the Presidency. Under the 12th Amendment Clinton remains eligible to be President.
People who argue about the semantics of the 22nd Amendemnt are trying to walk a camel through a needle. It’s clear that Bill Clinton cannot become President (or Vice President) again under the Constitution as it now stands. If you insist on contemplating possible scenarios to keep yourself up nights, consider however that nothing prohibits the repeal of the 22nd Amendment, thereby making it possible for Bill to run for a third, fourth, or fifth term of office if he chooses. Hell, there could be a new constitutional amendment making Clinton President-for-Life and God-Emperor-of-Dune. But face facts, you’ll see a Ralph Nader administration before you’ll see another Bill Clinton one.