In recent discussions that have Democrats squirming like someone just served them a plate of brisket at a PETA convention, President Donald Trump has hinted at the possibility of seeking a third term in office. To put it mildly, this has sparked considerable debate across the political spectrum. This article investigates the constitutional framework surrounding presidential term limits, explores potential avenues for a third term, and examines the arguments for and against such a development.

Constitutional Constraints and Historical Context

Way back in school, we all learned about the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which was ratified on February 27, 1951, and how it limits how long a person can serve as President. Specifically, it prohibits anyone from being elected to the presidency more than twice. It also says that if someone takes over as president and serves more than two years of someone else’s term—like if a vice president steps in after a resignation or death—that person can only be elected president one more time.

Since the amendment was passed, there have been multiple attempts to repeal it. Supporters of repeal argue that it limits voter choice and could prevent strong leadership during national emergencies. However, none of these efforts have made it past the early stages in Congress. They remember George Washington saying something about how a monarchical government in the US would cause “irrevocable and tremendous” harm. A definite “no-go” in the original Geo’s eyes.

When the amendment was first introduced, it included an exception for whoever was president at the time, which meant Harry Truman could have run for another term if he wanted, though he chose not to. To this day, the 22nd Amendment stands as an important rule to prevent any one person from holding the presidency for too long and to protect against the risk of a president trying to hold onto power indefinitely.

How Did FDR Serve Four Terms?

Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) was the only U.S. president who served four terms in office, and he did so because there were no official term limits at the time and because of the unique challenges the country faced. Before the 22nd Amendment was passed in 1951, there was no law limiting how many times a person could be elected president. There was an informal tradition, started by George Washington, of serving only two terms, but it wasn’t a legal rule. FDR broke that tradition, first because of the Great Depression and later because of World War II.

During the 1930s, FDR earned the trust of millions of Americans through his leadership during the Great Depression. His New Deal programs helped stabilize the economy and provided relief to struggling families. When World War II broke out in 1939, many Americans felt it was important to keep the same leader in place to guide the country through the crisis. FDR’s experience and steady leadership were seen as essential for both the war effort and future peace.

In the 1940 election, FDR won a third term by defeating Republican Wendell Willkie, focusing on his foreign policy experience as the world moved closer to war. In 1944, despite his declining health, he was elected to a fourth term, beating Republican Thomas E. Dewey by promising to finish the war and rebuild afterward.

FDR’s four-term presidency made history and raised concerns about the dangers of any one person holding too much power for too long. As a result, Congress passed the 22nd Amendment in 1947, and it was ratified by the states in 1951, officially limiting future presidents to two elected terms. FDR’s time in office remains one of the most significant periods in American history, showing how extraordinary events can lead to lasting changes in how the country is governed.

Russia, Russia, Russia

At this point, I’m beginning to wonder exactly how long Putin has been President of Russia. Seems like forever. It’s been about 20 years across multiple terms. He’s either been President or Prime Minister of Russia since December 31st, 1999.

Vladimir Putin circumvented Russia’s presidential term limits by initiating constitutional amendments in 2020 that reset his term-limit clock to zero. Previously, the Russian Constitution prohibited presidents from serving more than two consecutive terms. However, these amendments removed the word “consecutive” from the clause regulating term limits and discounted terms served before the amendments took effect, allowing Putin to run for reelection in 2024 and potentially remain in power until 2036. That’s some sneaky politics.

The constitutional changes were approved through a nationwide referendum, with 78% of voters supporting the amendments. While the Kremlin emphasized popular provisions like pension indexation and minimum wage guarantees, critics argued that the reforms primarily aimed to consolidate Putin’s power. Additionally, the amendments granted lifelong immunity to former presidents and expanded presidential powers, further solidifying Putin’s control over Russia’s political system.

Is Trump trying to “pull a Putin”? Guess we’ll have to wait and see.

President Trump’s Assertions and Legal Interpretations

Despite this clear constitutional limitation, President Trump has suggested that there are “methods” to pursue a third term, asserting that he is “not joking” about the possibility. One speculated strategy involves Vice President JD Vance running for president with the understanding that, upon election, he would resign, allowing Trump to assume the presidency through succession. This approach attempts to exploit the Amendment’s language, which prohibits being “elected” more than twice but does not explicitly forbid succession to the office. Legal experts, however, contend that such maneuvers would face significant constitutional challenges and are unlikely to succeed.

Arguments in Favor of a Third Term

Continuity of Leadership

Proponents argue that extending President Trump’s tenure could provide stability and continuity, especially during times of national or global crisis. They contend that his established policies and leadership style have fostered economic growth and bolstered national security, and a third term would allow for the completion of long-term initiatives.

Popular Support and Democratic Will

Supporters also point to the democratic principle of respecting the electorate’s choice. Suppose the American people clearly desire Trump’s continued leadership through the ballot box. In that case, some argue that this collective will should take precedence over constitutional constraints, warranting a re-examination of term limits.

Arguments Against a Third Term

Constitutional Integrity

Critics emphasize the importance of adhering to the Constitution’s provisions to maintain the rule of law. They argue that attempting to circumvent the 22nd Amendment undermines the foundational principles of the nation’s governance and sets a dangerous precedent for future leaders.

Risk of Authoritarianism

Opponents also raise concerns about the concentration of power and the potential erosion of democratic institutions. They caution that extending a president’s tenure beyond the established limits could lead to authoritarian tendencies, diminishing the checks and balances system designed to prevent power abuse.

Clearly, There Have Already Been People War Gaming the “What-Ifs”

 

Political and Public Response

The notion of a third term has elicited varied reactions from politicians and the public alike. Some of President Trump’s allies, including former adviser Steve Bannon, have voiced support for exploring avenues to extend his presidency. Conversely, figures like Representative Daniel Goldman have criticized such discussions, viewing them as attempts to erode democratic foundations.

Public opinion remains divided, with some citizens rallying behind the idea of continued leadership while others express concern over the implications for democratic norms and constitutional adherence.

 

Looking Forward

The debate over President Trump’s potential pursuit of a third term has triggered broader discussions about constitutional fidelity, democratic principles, and the balance of power within the United States. While the 22nd Amendment presents a clear barrier, the discourse surrounding this issue reflects American political life’s dynamic and often contentious nature. As this conversation unfolds, it will undoubtedly prompt further examination of the values and structures that underpin the nation’s democracy.