A Trump bid for a third term could set off legal battles in states nationwide

Los Angeles Times - Apr 1st, 2025

In a private 2018 meeting with China's President Xi Jinping, former President Donald Trump expressed interest in extending his presidency beyond the two-term limit set by the U.S. Constitution. This conversation, confirmed by Trump’s former national security advisor John Bolton, resurfaced as Trump recently told NBC he was 'not joking' about a potential third term. Trump's remarks have prompted election officials and legal experts to prepare for possible court challenges, as the 22nd Amendment clearly states that no one can be elected president more than twice. Some of Trump's allies, including Stephen Bannon, are reportedly strategizing on how to bypass these constitutional limits, though many legal scholars and attorneys, including Alan Dershowitz, argue such efforts would be futile without a constitutional amendment.

The implications of Trump’s ambitions are wide-ranging, with potential legal battles expected to arise across the United States. Election officials in states such as Arizona, where Trump previously contested election results, are already considering the legal framework for ballot access. The Republican Party's response will be crucial in determining whether Trump can pursue his ambitions, as they hold the initial decision-making power on nominating a candidate. The situation raises broader questions about the durability of constitutional norms and the precedent set by Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was the only president to serve more than two terms before the 22nd Amendment was enacted. As discussions unfold, the political landscape may become increasingly contentious, testing the boundaries of executive authority and the resilience of American democratic institutions.

Donald Trump Xi Jinping John Bolton U.S. Constitution 22nd Amendment Presidential Term Limits Election Law Stephen Bannon

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.2

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article effectively addresses a timely and controversial topic with significant public interest, exploring the possibility of Trump seeking a third term. It provides a detailed analysis of the legal and political challenges involved, supported by credible sources and expert opinions. While the factual accuracy is generally strong, some claims require further verification, particularly those involving private conversations and speculative strategies. The article maintains a balanced perspective, though it could benefit from more input from current Trump allies to fully round out the narrative. Overall, the story is well-written and engaging, with the potential to spark meaningful discussions and debates about constitutional norms and electoral integrity.

Accuracy

The story presents several factual claims that are largely supported by credible sources, though some elements require further verification. For example, the claim about Xi Jinping's comment to Trump at a 2018 summit is significant but lacks direct quotes or corroboration from other attendees, which could affect its verifiability. The article accurately discusses the legal barriers to a third term under the 22nd Amendment, a well-documented constitutional fact. However, speculative elements, such as the potential for Trump to pursue a vice-presidential route, are less substantiated and rely on interpretations of legal possibilities rather than established facts. Overall, while the article is grounded in factual legal frameworks, some claims about private conversations and speculative strategies require additional evidence to be fully accurate.

Balance

The article presents a range of perspectives, including those of legal experts, former Trump officials, and political strategists, which contributes to a balanced view of the potential for Trump to seek a third term. However, the narrative seems to lean more towards highlighting the improbability and legal challenges of such a move, potentially underrepresenting voices that might argue in favor of the feasibility of Trump's plans. The inclusion of statements from both supportive and critical figures, like John Bolton and Stephen Bannon, helps provide a spectrum of opinions, though the article could benefit from more input from current Trump allies or Republican leaders to ensure a fully rounded perspective.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and uses clear, concise language to convey complex legal and political concepts effectively. The logical flow from discussing the historical context of presidential term limits to the current speculation about Trump's intentions helps maintain reader engagement. The tone remains neutral, focusing on factual reporting rather than sensationalism, which aids clarity. However, some speculative elements, like the potential vice-presidential route, could be more clearly delineated from the factual content to avoid confusion.

Source quality

The article relies on a variety of sources, including statements from legal scholars, former Trump administration officials, and political strategists, which enhances its credibility. The use of direct quotes from individuals like John Bolton and Alan Dershowitz adds authority to the claims made. However, the anonymity of some sources, such as the former Arizona election official, slightly reduces transparency regarding their credibility. Overall, the article effectively utilizes authoritative sources to support its analysis, though it could benefit from more direct statements from current Trump allies or officials to strengthen the source quality further.

Transparency

The article provides a clear explanation of the legal and political context surrounding the possibility of Trump seeking a third term, which aids transparency. It outlines the constitutional limitations and potential legal challenges in detail, helping readers understand the basis for the claims. However, the lack of specific attribution for some claims, such as the private conversation between Xi Jinping and Trump, slightly diminishes transparency. Additionally, while the article mentions discussions and strategies being developed, it does not fully disclose the methodologies or evidence behind these claims, which could enhance transparency.