you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 95 points 7 hours ago* (34 children)

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice

Those are the exact words of the 22nd amendment. It's explicit. There's no ambiguity or room for other interpretations. Trump was elected twice, he's hit his limit, that's it.

  • source
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 hours ago

    No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice

    This is why is fun to own a whole ass supreme court:

    No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice

    Words are fun for this guy

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 3 hours ago

    Yes, and none of that prohibits him from running for office again. The only prohibition is that he cannot be elected a third time. But here’s the thing: we don’t actually vote for President; we vote for who our Electors elect as President, and they are Constitutionally prohibited from electing Trump to a third term. If Trump runs and “wins”, the Electors cannot elect him. He can win 0 Electoral votes. Doesn’t matter what their States’ laws require because the Constitution is the highest law in the land… until SCOTUS rules the 22nd Amendment violates the 10th Amendment. 🤷🏻‍♂️

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 5 hours ago (4 children)

    The one weasel notion that I wonder about, what if he was elected VP and the president stepped down directly after? Then he wasn't elected a 3rd time but placed by successions. It wouldn't surprise me to see them try some such fuckary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

    I don’t remember the exact wording, but basically to be eligible to be VP one must meet the eligibility requirements for being President. So he’s not eligible to be VP either.

    But I recall someone claiming that no such eligibility requirement exists for Speaker of the House, who is in the succession line after the VP.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 6 hours ago (7 children)

    Unless those rumors are true and they did manage to game enough voting machines to clinch the election. In which case he was not actually elected twice…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 6 hours ago (1 child)

    ...and 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 24 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

    There better be a real fucking riots in the streets across the entire damn nation if they come out with this bullshit.

    Like I mean burning down federal buildings and police stations, storming the homegrown concentration camps to free the prisoners, a literal million+ person march on Washington DC right to the front door of the White House.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 hours ago (1 child)

    Like the riots when an insurrectionist was allowed to run for a second term after being ruled ineligible by a State?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 4 hours ago

    But the Roberts Court, dontchaknow, intervened and went directly against the Constitution and made a BLATANTLY unconstitutional ruling that should have invalidated literally all of their appointments.

    Trump was ineligible for the second term, whether or not the Roberts Court wanted to acknowledge it.

    And hell will freeze over before I give those judges on the Roberts Court the dignity of referring to them with the words that other people call them or that court.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 4 hours ago (1 child)

    There's wiggle room, he's claiming a right to campaign. To run... He's not saying anything about being elected.

    He doesn't actually do the electing. That's up to public, and the officials who are in charge of elections (who he'll try to stack with loyalists). He can't say what they'll do.

    He runs, and if others elect him... Well... That's the wiggle room.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

    There is wiggle room in some amendments but this one seems pretty fucking clear.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

    It does specify that he has to be a person. Perhaps they're going to argue he isn't?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

    So it sounds like there's no prohibition against running, just against winning? Sounds like an easy win for the Dems.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

    It seems pointless to run in an election you are constitutionally barred from winning. But, Trump has proven time and time again he will do pointless things. If he tried running again and somehow he won, however, the constitution is clear: it's a no go. He can't get elected for a third time. That said, I don't think that's necessarily the point. I think the point is to create chaos and crisis. Hopefully he's not around to run in 2028 so it becomes a moot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments