Trump’s Comments on Potential Third Term Stirs Debate

President Trump openly considers a third term, challenging the constitutional limits that have governed the presidency for over seven decades.

Key Insights

Trump has stated he’s “not joking” about seeking a third presidential term despite the 22nd Amendment’s prohibition.
A Tennessee congressman introduced a resolution to amend the Constitution to allow non-consecutive third terms, though passage is highly unlikely.
Trump has suggested potential workarounds, including running as vice president and then assuming the presidency if the elected president resigns.
Constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority in Congress and approval by three-quarters of states, making changes to term limits improbable.
Legal experts assert there are no legitimate legal pathways for Trump to serve a third term under the current Constitution.

Trump’s Unprecedented Suggestion Sparks Constitutional Debate

President Donald Trump has ignited a new constitutional debate by publicly suggesting he could seek a third term in office. During a recent “Meet the Press” interview, Trump made clear his position, stating, “I’m not joking. I’m not joking” when asked about pursuing another term beyond the two-term limit established by the 22nd Amendment. This amendment, ratified in 1951 after Franklin D. Roosevelt served four consecutive terms, explicitly states that “no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice” — a constitutional barrier that has remained unchallenged for over 70 years.

Trump’s statements reflect his understanding that many supporters would welcome his continued leadership, suggesting that some view his potential third term as a continuation, particularly because of his claims about the 2020 election. He has further argued that the 22nd Amendment might only prohibit consecutive third terms, though constitutional scholars overwhelmingly reject this interpretation as contrary to the amendment’s clear language and intent.

Proposed Constitutional Pathways

Despite the seemingly insurmountable constitutional barriers, some Trump allies have begun exploring potential pathways to extend his presidency. Republican Representative Andy Ogles has introduced a resolution to amend the Constitution to allow non-consecutive third terms. However, constitutional amendments require approval by two-thirds of both houses of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of state legislatures — a threshold that makes any such change highly improbable in today’s political environment.

One scenario Trump acknowledged as possible involves running as a vice-presidential candidate in 2028, then becoming president if the elected president were to resign. However, legal experts point out that the 12th Amendment likely prevents this maneuver, as it states that “no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President.” Even Trump’s own attorney general nominee, Pam Bondi, when questioned during confirmation hearings, confirmed that Trump cannot run for a third term “unless they change the Constitution.”

Opposition and Political Strategy

Democrats have reacted strongly against Trump’s suggestions. Representative Daniel Goldman expressed alarm at what he described as “another escalation in his clear effort to take over the government and dismantle our democracy.” The congressman called on Republicans to “go on the record opposing Trump’s ambitions for a third term” if they believe in the Constitution. Meanwhile, constitutional scholars from across the political spectrum have maintained that there are no legitimate legal pathways for Trump to serve beyond two terms.

Some political analysts suggest Trump’s discussion of a third term serves primarily political purposes rather than representing a serious constitutional challenge. By keeping the possibility alive, Trump projects strength to supporters and avoids being perceived as a lame-duck president during his second term. This approach aligns with Trump’s long-standing strategy of testing political boundaries and maintaining his central position in national political conversation, regardless of constitutional constraints that would make such ambitions virtually impossible to achieve.