Donald Trump hasn’t yet begun his second term, but his allies are already setting the stage for a third administrative run under the president-elect.
Speaking at the New York Young Republican Club on Sunday, War Room podcast host and former Trump adviser Steve Bannon suggested that conservatives should rally to keep the MAGA leader in power via a supposed loophole in the U.S. Constitution.
“Donald John Trump is going to raise his hand on the King James Bible and take the oath of office, his third victory and his second term,” Bannon said at the club’s annual gala.
“And the viceroy Mike Davis tells me, since it doesn’t actually say consecutive, that, I don’t know, maybe we do it again in ’28?” Bannon continued, referring to one of Trump’s former attorney general hopefuls. “Are you guys down for that? Trump ’28?”
It’s not even the first time this year that conservative figureheads have argued in favor of violating the Constitution to upgrade Trump’s authoritarian power.
The Twenty-Second Amendment, which was ratified in 1951, states that “no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, 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.” Congress pushed for the term limit after President Franklin D. Roosevelt served three terms through World War II, fearing future abuses of power.
Only one clear exception exists for a person to serve more than two terms: a vice president who claims the Oval Office through succession after the death or resignation of a president could go on for another two terms, if and only if their initial time at the top of the executive branch lasted less than two years.
But in April, a feature story in The American Conservative flat-out advocated for the total repeal of the Twenty-Second Amendment, arguing that the country should override the shackles of the two-term limit on the basis that the authors of the amendment couldn’t have predicted the allure of a far-right candidate with a frenetic base.
“If, by 2028, voters feel Trump has done a poor job, they can pick another candidate; but if they feel he has delivered on his promises, why should they be denied the freedom to choose him once more?” American Conservative contributor Peter Tonguette wrote at the time.
