Posted on 01/24/2025 6:43:51 AM PST by Red Badger
Key Points
* A Republican House member introduced a resolution to amend the U.S. Constitution to allow President Donald Trump — and any other future president — to be elected to serve a third term.
* Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee introduced the measure days after Trump was sworn in for a second nonconsecutive term in the White House.
* The 22nd Amendment currently bars anyone from being elected to more than two terms.
===================================================================
A Republican House member introduced a resolution Thursday to amend the U.S. Constitution in order to allow President Donald Trump — and any other future president — to be elected to a third term in the White House.
Trump “has proven himself to be the only figure in modern history capable of reversing our nation’s decay and restoring America to greatness, and he must be given the time necessary to accomplish that goal,” said Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee, who proposed extending the current maximum of two elected terms.
“It is imperative that we provide President Trump with every resource necessary to correct the disastrous course set by the Biden administration,” Ogles said in a statement.
“He is dedicated to restoring the republic and saving our country, and we, as legislators and as states, must do everything in our power to support him,” said Ogles, a hard-line conservative who is serving his second term in the House.
“I am proposing an amendment to the Constitution to revise the limitations imposed by the 22nd Amendment on presidential terms,” he added.
Ogles’ move came three days after Trump was sworn in for a second, nonconsecutive term — becoming only the second U.S. president to accomplish that feat.
And the resolution comes two months after Rep. Dan Goldman, a New York Democrat, introduced a House resolution that “reaffirms that the Twenty-second Amendment applies to two terms in the aggregate as President of the United States,” and that the amendment applies to the 78-year-old Trump.
A White House spokesperson did not immediately reply to a request for comment on Ogles’ resolution.
The 22nd Amendment of the Constitution states in part, “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice.”
Ogles’ resolution seeks to revise this to read, ”’No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than three times.”
The original amendment also states, “No person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.”
In his statement Thursday, Ogles said the resolution he was introducing “would allow President Trump to serve three terms, ensuring that we can sustain the bold leadership our nation so desperately needs.”
Proposed in 1947 and ratified in 1951, the 22nd Amendment was authored to prevent a repeat of President Franklin Roosevelt’s unprecedented election to four terms in office.
To this day, Roosevelt is the only president ever to have been elected to more than two terms. He died in 1945, less than 90 days after his fourth inauguration.
Republicans currently hold an extremely narrow, three-seat majority in the House. Few, if any Democrats, are likely to vote for Ogles’ resolution with Trump in office.
Trump is open to it
Over the course of his political career, Trump has repeatedly hinted at his willingness to serve more than two terms in office.
“I suspect I won’t be running again, unless you say, ‘He’s so good we’ve got to figure something else out,’” Trump reportedly mused to House Republicans during a private meeting in November, shortly after his electoral victory over Democratic former Vice President Kamala Harris.
Speaking to members of the National Rifle Association in May, Trump said, ″I don’t know, are we going to be considered three-term or two-term? Are we three-term or two-term if we win?″
Trump’s openness to a third term does not come as a surprise to some people who know him.
The former Fox News journalist Geraldo Rivera, who was friendly with Trump for decades in New York, predicted in December that Trump and his allies would soon turn their attention to the 22nd Amendment.
“For future reference: President Trump & Co. will soon start chattering about revoking/amending the 22d Amendment, which limits presidents to two four year terms,” Rivera wrote on X.
Other ways to stay in power
Amending the Constitution is not the only way that Trump could stay in power after his current term ends.
“Though the 22nd Amendment prohibits Trump from being elected president again, it does not prohibit him from serving as president beyond Jan. 20, 2029,” wrote Philip Klinkner, a professor of government at Hamilton College, in a recent article in The Conversation.
“The reason for this is that the 22nd Amendment only prohibits someone from being ‘elected’ more than twice,” Klinker wrote. “It says nothing about someone becoming president in some other way than being elected to the office.”
Klinker wrote that one hypothetical scenario would be for Trump to run for vice president in 2028, and have Vice President JD Vance run at the top of the ticket, for president.
“If elected, Vance could then resign, making Trump president again,” Klinker wrote. “But Vance would not even have to resign in order for a Vice President Trump to exercise the power of the presidency.
The 25th Amendment to the Constitution states that if a president declares that ‘he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office … such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.’ ”
Another scenario Klinker imagined is for Trump to encourage a family member to run for, and win, the White House. Once elected, they would serve as little more than a figurehead president, while Trump made the key decisions.
No. Two terms and out. Unless you want a Dem president for 12 years too.
Plus Trump will be 82 at the end of this term.
Most misery is caused by Republican efforts:
Amendment XIV
Earl Warren
teacher tenure
I hate this nonsense. I Truly do.... I hate it when either side does this.
It has ZERO chance of passing or being ratified, let alone doing so before Trump’s term is up.
We have real importing crap to deal with trying to recover from 4 years of destruction... and this nobody congressman out of TN just wants to get some attention and media time with this nonsense.
Somebody slap this person silly and tell him to get to doing the real work he’s payed nearly 200k a year to do.
lets all be real for a moment. First of all, this will never have the votes to pass an amendment to the constitution. Second of all Trump .. lets be honest... is a massive heart attack just waiting to happen. I will be amazed if he makes it through his entire term honestly.
He is the type that will be working hard ... and then just fall over.
Non-starter of course but it will be mildly entertaining to watch the exploding heads at some of the lefty sites.
I don’t think so.
President Trump should announce his opposition to this bill. He’ll be 82 at the end of his term, his work will be done, then he can pass the torch to JD Vance.
see post 43
I hate this nonsense. I Truly do.... I hate it when either side does this.
It has ZERO chance of passing or being ratified, let alone doing so before Trump’s term is up.
The democrats did this all the time. So many outlandish proposals we couldn’t keep track of them. and a few they actually got done. The purpose of this is a shiny thing to distract the democrats, to get all of us thinking about our history and why we do things.
“WASHINGTON — Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., plans to file a resolution in the House on Thursday that would express support for the 22nd Amendment of the Constitution, which sets the term limits for the president.”
here the rats were so worried that they proposed a resolution, they didn’t trust the constitution. I am pretty sure when zero was president it was proposed.
Trump is having fun with the democrats.
read the article closely from cnbc. They are all flustered. Trump is good at what he does.
Im not for this at all! Had this been the law all along, we’d have a third term of Clinton and possibly a third Obama. No thanks!
No and waste of time...
No.
Once President Trump has done all he can, and I support him getting his promised agenda done in 4 years or set in proper motion, the Republic should be returned to We the People’s hands by that time. It is then up to us, to diligently work to keep it. We all must become Legacy-makers.
Virtue signaling feel good non sense will go nowhere. Work harder, no one cares.
I know...it’s just trolling them. Like Trump talking about making Canada the 51st state.
"Constitutional amendment to allow Trump third term introduced in the House"
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
If very corrupt, Constitution-ignoring state and federal lawmakers that misguided voters keep reelecting started to respect their constitutionally limited powers, then Trump could be enjoying retirement on the golf courses.
Until that happens, PDJT47's mission is to get rid of the deep state, ideally making like without a deep state permanent by repealing the 16th (16A; direct taxes) and 17th Amendments (17A; popular voting for federal senators).
The fat lady sings.
But until 16&17A are gone, political party abuse of 16A, which is also weakening our 4th Amendment protections imo, will continue to be the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for organized crime imo.
If Trump doesn't lead the states to get rid of these misguided amendments, then it wouldn't be surprising to see Kamala Harris in the Oval Office in a generation imo.
"16th Amendment: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived [emphasis added], without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
"4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
“If the tax be not proposed for the common defence, or general welfare, but for other objects, wholly extraneous, (as for instance, for propagating Mahometanism among the Turks, or giving aids and subsidies to a foreign nation, to build palaces for its kings, or erect monuments to its heroes,) it would be wholly indefensible upon constitutional principles [emphases added].” — Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 2 (1833).
The congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified the federal government's constitutionally limited powers as follows.
”Simply this, that the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Constitution, is in the States and not in the federal government [emphases added]. I have sought to effect no change in that respect in the Constitution of the country.” —John Bingham, Congressional. Globe. 1866, page 1292 (see top half of third column)
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
“Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, judges and governors, shall all become wolves [emphasis added]. It seems to be the law of our general nature.” - Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Edward Carrington January 16, 1787)
Pelosi: "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it." (non-FR; 6 sec.)
Illegals are indeed getting immediate Social Security, contrary to Democrat claims (7.11.24)
Democrats [and RINOs] Are Terrified Of An Educated And Informed Public (3.12.23)
I hope it goes down in flames. This is wrong.
“The amendment would never get the necessary votes in the Senate or House, or be ratified by three-quarters of the states in time for the 2028 election.”
Back in ‘88, I remember getting fundraising appeals by a GOP group that wanted to change the amendment so Reagan could run for a third term. IIRC, this was not sanctioned by Reagan or his staff - but was an effort by some DC political activists to raise money and their profiles.
I knew it wasn’t gonna work and that it’d be a waste to send a donation - so those mailings got placed in the circular file.
Ogles should wait until it’s proven that President Trump won in 2020 by a landslide. Then introduce this bill.
If two terms doesn’t kill him, a third would.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.