# Trump won't rule out 3rd term **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Tags:** trump\ **Created:** [March 31, 2025, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371 "2025-03-31T01:50:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/101 "2025-03-31T22:05:09Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Whats your plan besides telling everyone that he can’t be stopped and there’s nothing we can do? We could try to get the Democrats in swing states to get out and vote against him. That worked oh so well in 2020 … Dammit, we’re going to have a third term Trump. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/102 "2025-03-31T22:09:02Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > No, it is clearly to prevent people from being _elected_ for more than two terms. So your argument is that in drafting the 22nd amendment, Congress thought the problem was that FDR hadn’t been sneaky enough when seeking a third and fourth term, and they thought that he should have run on Henry Wallace’s ticket instead? That if only he’d done it that way instead there’d have been no problem? I’d like to see your source for that. We have the congressional record - surely the transcript of the “presidents should be able to serve for life as long as they’re clever about it” speeches must be in there. > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > We could try to get the Democrats in swing states to get out and vote against him. That worked oh so well in 2020 … Dammit, we’re going to have a third term Trump. With that attitude, sure. Have you ever noticed that presidential candidates never tell the crowds at their speeches that they’re not gonna win, even if they’re behind? I wonder why that could be. ---
**Author:** ![duality72](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duality72/32/3910_2.png) [@duality72](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/duality72)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/103 "2025-03-31T22:15:34Z")
Shouldn’t it be Fourth Reich, though? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/104 "2025-03-31T22:17:30Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > Long ago… before Obama and then Biden were elected?! Of course. That’s why I called it a ratchet; they let what the Republicans preceding them stand and were mainly just placeholders until the next Republican got in and yanked things farther right. If by some miracle a Democrat got into office post-Trump? They wouldn’t _fix_ anything. They’d just let the government shamble along in its wrecked state rambling about the “norms” and “bipartisanship” until the _next_ fascist got in. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/105 "2025-03-31T22:23:04Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > So your argument is that in drafting the 22nd amendment, Congress thought the problem was that FDR hadn’t been sneaky enough when seeking a third and fourth term, and they thought that he should have run on Henry Wallace’s ticket instead? I think there was a cognitive blindness that anyone would even try to use it as a loophole. If I were a Justice I would rule that the 22nd Amendment bars being elected a third time but allows you to become a President a third time. Saying that, there are many times justices twist or even ignore the meaning of words in the Constitution to obtain a desired outcome. If this SCOTUS were to say blah blah blah Trump cannot be Vice-President it would not shock me. If they were to say blah blah blah Trump can be directly elected a third time it would not shock me. ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/106 "2025-03-31T22:23:55Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Why can’t he be elected VP? Like you say, there are two avenues to the Presidency - election and succession - and the 22nd Amendment blocks just one of them: election. He’s still eligible to succeed to the Presidency. > > So per the 12th Amendment, he is **not** a “person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President,” just ineligible to be _elected_ to it, so he is not barred by the 12th Amendment from being VP. (ETA: The only reason to bar someone from being VP is if they’re ineligible to _succeed_ to the Presidency. That’s what the VP is _there_ for.) **[Jay Kuo’s response](https://statuskuo.substack.com/p/a-third-trump-term)** to this particular line of reasoning: > _ **No Constitutional “gotchas”** _ > > Common sense, along with any reading that tries to stay true to the spirit of the two amendments, would say Trump can’t run as VP and then slip in to become President through a crazy loophole. Critics of backdoor presidencies would argue that the 22nd Amendment was intended to create a _ **new class of ineligibility** _ , along with age, citizenship, and birthplace. It made a twice-elected president outright ineligible, even if it didn’t use that specific word. > > It follows, then, that because the 12th Amendment made anyone who is _constitutionally ineligible_ to be President from serving as Vice President, that ineligibility should and must include people who have been elected President twice before. > > Think of it this way: It’s as if the 22nd Amendment simply added to the presidential eligibility restrictions on age, citizen and birthplace the requirement that you can’t have been elected twice before. Because, under these criteria, Trump is ineligible to be President, he is ineligible to be _Vice_ President per the 12th Amendment, and therefore he cannot ever run as a VP candidate. > > Moreover, the point of the 22nd Amendment was to prevent the occurrence of another dynastic presidency after four terms of FDR. Allowing Trump to return via some loophole would undermine the purpose of the amendment, which is something courts are supposedly there to prevent. > > Moreover, the U.S. Constitution should be read as a whole to ensure consistency across its various parts. Allowing Trump a backdoor way to become President again by first being elected Vice President would create contradictions within the structure of the document. One provision, the 22nd Amendment, which broadly prohibits that outcome would be undone by the twisted reading of another, the 12th Amendment. > > Finally, the Constitution should be interpreted to avoid illogical results. Here, that result would be that the American people cannot elect a certain individual to the presidency, but they could wind up with the same guy through some wild, unexpected succession. > > That. Makes. No. Sense. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/107 "2025-03-31T22:49:47Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > If I were a Justice I would rule that the 22nd Amendment bars being elected a third time but allows you to become a President a third time. Why? On what grounds? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/108 "2025-03-31T23:25:46Z")
Because it says you cannot be elected specifically. That would allow for other ways to become President. You can argue that it is poorly written in that it allows a loophole, but it is not SCOTUS’s job to rewrite bad laws. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/109 "2025-03-31T23:45:59Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > If this SCOTUS were to say blah blah blah Trump cannot be Vice-President it would not shock me. If they were to say blah blah blah Trump can be directly elected a third time it would not shock me. The current court sucks ass, but I think this is a misrepresentation of its vices. It doesn’t just rubber stamp everything Trump wants. In 2021, it shot down everything Trump came up with to try to steal the election. Further, this court, when it makes bad decisions, tends to make _complicated_ bad decisions. The whole presidential immunity thing is a joke, but it’s a recondite, Baroque joke. The court didn’t misread the plain, simple text of the constitution; rather, it saw a bunch of things in there that aren’t there at all. The intent of the 22nd amendment is as simple as it gets. The court would not rule that Trump can be VP and use that as a back door to the presidency. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/110 "2025-03-31T23:52:14Z")
> [@DavidNRockies](#): > > I think Trump is less of a fluke that rose out of chaos by happenstance than the byproduct of a targeted campaign helped along by party organization, resources, and machinery, even if not initially. That “if not initially” is very important. Also, Trump is nuts and does and says whatever he wants. Were any of these companies and organizations in on the electric boat/shark joke that Trump was saying at every rally? That said, yeah, they were working with a bunch of dough and were making and buying ads, etc., based on data, etc. But I actually agree with you in that Trump was not a fluke that rose out of chaos. He is an extremely talented demagogue. The real question is why he didn’t run for president sooner. Maybe he really needed the extra money and name recognition/popularity from _The Apprentice_ in order to do it. But why not 2012? Etc. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/111 "2025-03-31T23:55:28Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > The intent of the 22nd amendment is as simple as it gets. The problem is, so is the wording. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/112 "2025-03-31T23:55:35Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Because it says you cannot be elected specifically. That would allow for other ways to become President. You can argue that it is poorly written in that it allows a loophole, but it is not SCOTUS’s job to rewrite bad laws. So you would, as a justice, rule that the 22nd amendment doesn’t mean what it says and what its writers meant it to say, on the basis that they should’ve been more pedantic in case someone decided 80 years later to rules-lawyer it like a medieval rabbi trying to find a loophole in the Talmud so he can have hot food for lunch on Saturday or carry a book across the street? The Constitution is just a gotcha ya to be end-run around by people clever enough to twist its words like a genie in a cautionary tale about being careful what you wish for? That might get you on Trump’s short list for the next vacancy, but I’m hoping that whoever the Heritage Foundation orders him to nominate next is built of sterner stuff. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/113 "2025-03-31T23:56:34Z")
A bad-faith jurist could point out that “eligible” has the same root word as “elect”, so one could say that “ineligible” simply means they can’t run for election, but could be appointed. I’m skeptical it will fly, though I think there’s a non-zero chance that it gets raised. Keep in mind though, that although nobody can stop Trump from saying “I’m campaigning for a third term”, no state is obligated to violate the Constitution and put him on the ballot, and if they did, it would definitely be challenged in court. It’s conceivable that SCOTUS would make some bogus ruling that states would be bound to follow, but that whole “let them enforce it” problem cuts both ways. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2025, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/114 "2025-03-31T23:57:25Z")
> [@](#): > > So you would, as a justice, rule that the 22nd amendment doesn’t mean what it says and what its writers meant it to say, No; that it means what it says, _rather than_ what they meant it to say. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/115 "2025-04-01T00:01:09Z")
> [@Aeschines](#): > > The current court sucks ass, but I think this is a misrepresentation of its vices. > > It doesn’t just rubber stamp everything Trump wants. In 2021, it shot down everything Trump came up with to try to steal the election I agree largely (though I’d add “ **probably** won’t just rubber stamp everything Trump wants”) But the critical word there is “current”. Trump will spend the next four years making sure he has a court that will rubber stamp everything he wants. The 2028 supreme court will make the 2024 supreme court look like the very model unbiased constitutional rectitude ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/116 "2025-04-01T00:05:55Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > No; that it means what it says, _rather than_ what they meant it to say. If it was meant to say that you could run for vice president and then get a third term that way, they would have explicitly stated that and there would be speeches in the Congressional Record indicating as such. The text would state “Nothing in this article shall prevent a person twice elected president from being ineligible to the office of vice-president or from serving as president during a term to which another person shall have been elected” if that’s what it was supposed to say. This kind of pedantic quibbling where a lawyer discovers some accidental miswording that completely inverts the meaning of a statute and wins on that basis only happens in courtroom dramas. ---
**Author:** ![Dr\_Paprika](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr_paprika/32/3042_2.png) [@Dr\_Paprika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr_Paprika)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/117 "2025-04-01T00:09:01Z")
Did Pelosi call “no backsies”? I can’t remember. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/118 "2025-04-01T00:13:32Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > If it was meant to say that you could run for vice president and then get a third term that way, they would have explicitly stated that and there would be speeches in the Congressional Record indicating as such. The text would state “Nothing in this article shall prevent a person twice elected president from being ineligible to the office of vice-president or from serving as president during a term to which another person shall have been elected” if that’s what it was supposed to say. I don’t give a shit about what it “was meant to say” or “what it was supposed to say.” I’m interested in what it _does_ say. I’m interested in what it _in fact_ says. You’re talking about what the law isn’t, rather than what it is. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/119 "2025-04-01T00:26:54Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > I don’t give a shit about what it “was meant to say” or “what it was supposed to say.” I’m interested in what it _does_ say. I’m interested in what it _in fact_ says. What it says is there’s a two-term limit on the presidency because that’s how George Washington said it should be and we don’t want any more FDRs. If you know of a case where the Supreme Court has ruled that the clear meaning of a statute was invalid because the wording wasn’t sufficiently pedantic, please present that precedent. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2025, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371/120 "2025-04-01T00:27:13Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > Trump will spend the next four years making sure he has a court that will rubber stamp everything he wants. The 2028 supreme court will make the 2024 supreme court look like the very model unbiased constitutional rectitude No Liberal on the court is going to retire while Trump is in office, and how many “conservatives” will? If Thomas and Alito are going, no one could be worse than they are anyway… And who’s to say that the supposed rubber-stampers will work out for him? It’s turned out that Amy Coney Barrett thinks for herself and has ruled with the Liberals on multiple occasions now. It’s not clear that even the currently corrupt senate would approve a complete Trump lickspittle like Aileen Cannon, nor is it a given that the GOP will retain the senate in 2026. Finally, the SC still has to _pretend_ to do that justice thing. To construe the 22nd amendment as allowing a back door route to the presidency would be to give up completely any pretense of caring. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-wont-rule-out-3rd-term/1016371.md?page=7)