Has trump tried to change laws to allow a 3rd term?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Donald Trump and some allies have floated ideas and rhetoric about ways he might serve a third presidential term, and conservative publications and Project 2025 partners have proposed repealing or revising the 22nd Amendment; but legal scholars, constitutional experts and reporting indicate no viable, legal path has been successfully executed and repeal or circumvention would be extremely difficult and litigated [1] [2] [3]. Political gestures and op-eds have appeared, a few lawmakers introduced proposals, and Trump himself has hinted at “methods” while denying support for formally challenging the amendment — a pattern of exploration and signaling rather than an enacted change in law [4] [5] [6].
1. What has Trump said and signaled about a third term?
President Trump publicly suggested there are “methods” that could enable a third term in interviews and at events, language that generated widespread media attention and speculation about legal workarounds, while at other times he disclaimed support for formally challenging the amendment; reportage shows those statements triggered analysis but did not constitute concrete legal changes or enacted legislation [6] [4].
2. Who has proposed changing the law, and what have they suggested?
Conservative commentators and some Project 2025–aligned outlets have urged repeal or reinterpretation of the 22nd Amendment so Trump could run again, with The American Conservative publishing pieces arguing repeal is justified and other allies publicly debating strategies, and at least one member of Congress introduced a joint resolution to amend term limits language — all proposals, however, remaining advocacy or bills without successful amendment of the Constitution [2] [1] [5].
3. What specific legal or political routes have been floated?
Analysts and POLITICO mapped out several hypothetical paths: a straightforward repeal of the 22nd Amendment via the constitutional amendment process, unusual succession or vice-presidential schemes, or reinterpretation of amendment text — options that commentators warned would be politically fraught, procedurally cumbersome and legally contestable [1] [7].
4. How do constitutional scholars assess those ideas?
Legal experts reject the idea of a simple loophole as implausible, emphasize that repealing or changing the 22nd requires a formal amendment with two-thirds of both chambers and ratification by three-quarters of states, and note that suggested circumventions (like installing a surrogate vice president then installing the former president) would face serious judicial challenges and conflict with other constitutional provisions such as the 12th Amendment — scholars call the “loophole” theory legally weak [3] [7] [8].
5. Has any law actually been changed or enacted to enable a third term?
No; reporting and records show no enacted repeal or constitutional amendment permitting a third term, and past efforts to repeal the 22nd have historically failed — what exists in the public record are proposals, op-eds and isolated congressional resolutions, not a change in law that would allow Trump to be elected a third time [7] [5] [8].
6. Motives, media framing and political risk
Advocates for repeal frame it as restoring voter choice or responding to a unique popular leader, while critics and many mainstream outlets frame such efforts as threats to constitutional limits and democratic norms; Project 2025 ties and conservative think pieces indicate an organized intellectual backing for the idea, but those same ties reveal partisan and theological agendas that color the proposals and make broader political buy-in unlikely [2] [4] [9].
7. Bottom line: has Trump tried to change laws to allow a third term?
He and his allies have flirted publicly with concepts and some supporters have proposed formal repeal, but there has been no successful legal change: the activity to date is rhetorical, advocacy and limited legislative probing — not a realized alteration of the constitutional rule that would lawfully permit a third elected term [1] [2] [3].