this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
93 points (100.0% liked)

Pravda News!

343 readers
350 users here now

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Political observers are expressing alarm after several of President Donald Trump's lifetime judicial nominees refused to say whether he is eligible to run for a third term.

During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday, Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) asked Trump judicial nominee John Marck to describe the 22nd Amendment of the US Constitution, which states that "no person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice."

"The 22nd Amendment... senator, my career has mostly been in criminal prosecution, I haven't had an opportunity to use that one, specifically," Marck replied.

JUST IN: A Trump judicial nominee was asked point blank: is Trump eligible to run for a third term?

Their answer: “I would have to review the actual wording…”

Sen. Chris Coons then asked every nominee in the room to confirm the Constitution bars a third term.

Silence.

Every… pic.twitter.com/LzUZxFzaOL
— Brian Allen (@allenanalysis) May 4, 2026

"Anyone able to help on the 22nd Amendment?" Coons asked the other judicial nominees at the hearing, one of whom explained that it was the amendment that sets a two-term limit for the presidency.

"Correct," Coons replied. "It states that no person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice. Mr. Marck, is President Trump eligible to run again for president in 2028?"

"Senator, without considering all the facts and looking at everything, depending on what the situation is, this, to me, strikes as something more of a hypothetical..."

"It's not a hypothetical," Coons interjected. "Has President Trump been elected president twice?"

"President Trump has been certified as president of the United States two times," Marck acknowledged.

"Is he eligible to run for a third term under our Constitution?" Coons asked.

"Uhm, I would have to review the..." Marck began before Coons again interjected.

"All I need to tell you is the language of the constitutional amendment that makes it clear that no, he is not eligible for a third term," the senator said.

Coons then challenged other Trump judicial nominees at the hearing—Southern District of Florida nominee Jeffrey Kuntz, Southern District of Texas nominee Arthur Roberts Jones, and Northern District of Ohio nominee Michael Hendershot—to say if they believed the Constitution barred Trump from running for a third term, and none of them did.

After watching video of Coons' exchange with Trump judicial nominees, investigative journalist and author Nick Bryant declared the whole episode to be "really chilling."

"Like a scene from a dystopian movie, and alarming for anyone who cares about democracy," Bryant wrote in a Monday social media post. "A judicial nominee flagrantly flouting the Constitution about Trump's eligibility for a third term. The Constitution is unambiguous. He is not eligible."

Former Democratic presidential candidate Marianne Williamson noted that the Trump nominees were "not even pretending to honor the Constitution" during the hearing, while former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) simply declared the entire exchange "unreal."

While the chances of Trump being allowed to stand for an unconstitutional third term at the moment are very low, the president has repeatedly teased plans to run for president again in 2028, telling an audience on Monday that he would be leaving the White House "eight or nine years from now."

Joyce Vance, a former federal prosecutor and current professor at the University of Alabama School of Law, said that Trump's declared intention to run for a third term should not be brushed off as mere trolling.

"This is how he started with the whole 'if I lose the election is fraudulent' shtick," she wrote. "If we don’t listen to this, shame on us. That man isn’t building a ballroom for the next guy."


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 hour ago

The next question should have been is Obama eligible to run for a third term?

If one can do it then the other can do it too right?

They might not want to say trump can or can't but then they should have gone further. Can Bush run a third time?

Can Clinton run a third time?

[–] Insekticus@aussie.zone 3 points 2 hours ago

Now that's the face of a child-eater if I've ever seen one.

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

It was all a performance for an audience of one; King Cheeto himself.

Part of the reason for the weird verbiage “certified as President” is because they’re trying to keep consistency while upholding the “Biden stole 2020” lie, and keep Trump happy without perjuring themselves.

[–] FerretyFever0@fedia.io 9 points 6 hours ago

Sorry, he "hasn't had an opportunity to use that one"? Fun fact about the constitutional amendments, anyone can read them and know what they mean. Some of them have some potentially different interpretations, but most of them are pretty simple. An elementary school aged child can understand the 22nd Amendment.

[–] reluctant_squidd@lemmy.ca 14 points 7 hours ago

In trying to look at this from multiple angles. I imagine the reasoning for his decision to side-step the obvious as at least one of the following:

  1. A general fear of MAGA ire.
  2. A legitimate fear of a targeted threat.
  3. The follow through of a pre-arranged and agreed upon eventuality.
  4. Continuation as being a spineless PoS.
  5. Outrageous amounts of bribe money.

Ultimately, I have decided it to be a combination of all of these, plus more that I don’t care to think about right now, since this already took too much of my life away to think about.

[–] Whostosay@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 hours ago

I like the unwillingness to admit he was elected twice. You'd think they'd go for the he was elected 3 times but cheated!

I'm almost certain he was elected once and has been sworn in twice. Either way, we should be pulling this thread.

[–] Krusty@quokk.au 4 points 5 hours ago