Context:

The discussion around President Trump's musings about potentially seeking a third term highlights concerns regarding the violation of constitutional norms, specifically the 22nd Amendment which limits presidents to two terms. Trump's repeated suggestions, coupled with merchandise promoting a 2028 run, are seen as attempts to normalize the idea of extending his presidency beyond the legal limits. These actions align with his history of testing the boundaries of presidential power and disregarding constitutional checks. While some Republican leaders dismiss his comments as jokes, the editorial argues for a stronger response to uphold constitutional integrity. Legal scholars and politicians emphasize that the 22nd and 12th Amendments firmly prohibit a third term, and any changes to this law would require a formal and legal process rather than mere rhetoric or suggestion.

Dive Deeper:

• The 22nd Amendment, ratified in 1951, was designed to prevent any president from serving more than two terms, a reaction to Franklin D. Roosevelt's four-term presidency, with an intent to avert potential dictatorial power.

• President Trump's musings about a potential third term, despite the constitutional restrictions, are seen as part of a broader pattern where he challenges and tests the limits of presidential power and norms.

• Trump's comments on the possibility of serving beyond two terms, along with the sale of 'Trump 2028' merchandise, suggest a strategy to keep the idea alive in public discourse, despite constitutional barriers.

• Some Republican leaders, such as Senator John Thune, have downplayed Trump's third-term remarks as jokes or rhetorical provocations, but the editorial board cautions against underestimating the seriousness of such statements.

• The editorial highlights Trump's previous actions that demonstrate a disregard for constitutional checks, such as attempts to bypass legal rulings and executive orders challenging established amendments.

• Legal interpretation of the 22nd and 12th Amendments makes it clear that a president cannot serve more than two terms, and any attempt to change this would require a constitutional amendment process, not merely speculative discourse.

• The editorial calls for strong reaffirmation from political leaders and legal experts to uphold the constitutional limits on presidential terms and resist any rhetoric that implies otherwise.