I constantly see the 25th Amendment bandied about as a way to remove Trump, but it will not work.

[Celerity]

2/3rds of BOTH the House and the Senate have to approve it if Trump challenges it. That is not going to happen. So it is even harder than Impeachment and Trial, Conviction, and Removal, as the House only needs majority to impeach. Plus the obvious barrier that the VP and the majority of the Cabinet has to invoke the 25th in the first place.

No idea why so many think the 25th is a viable option. The ONLY way Trump is leaving is if he loses the 2020 election, or his 2nd term runs out, or he dies or is permanently incapacitated via a illness or accident in office.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxxv

[Jarqui]

1. The GOP has enabled this heartless madman

Just don't forget that in November.

[elleng]

2. It's part of the Constitution, and we're optimistic.

We are also aware of the chances, understand the politics of the day.

I could live contentedly without the negativity.

[unblock]

5. it's mathematically harder than removal via impeachment.

i'm all for optimism, but there is zero point in going out of one's way to seek a solution that has every obstacle removal via impeachment has and then adds even more obstacles.

let's just impeach him again. and again. and be optimistic about that, as it only requires simple majority in the house (which we've proven we can get) and 2/3rd of the senate -- the *only* real obstacle.

why look to something that requires all that *and* 2/3rds of the house instead of 1/2, *and* the vice-president *and* a majority of the cabinet?

if we can get all that, we can get removal via impeachment anyway.

[TwilightZone]

6. If they wouldn't impeach him, they're not going to remove him via 25th.

Not sure why it remains a topic of discussion, but it's rather popular.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. You're quite correct. Also, it was intended to deal with a situation

where the president becomes incapacitated and there is the possibility he will recover, as when Reagan was shot. It allows the Cabinet and the VP to determine the issue, and the Cabinet is involved to keep the VP from taking over without sufficient reason. It wasn't designed to deal with a president who is obviously as mad as a box of frogs (and permanently so) but who has the loyalty of a sycophantic cabinet.

[unblock]

4. agreed, it's frustrating how often this remedy *keeps* coming up

the 25th amendment wasn't intended to remove a horrible president. it was really only meant to remove a comatose president, or a president so incapacitated by stroke, e.g., that virtually *everyone* agrees he simply can't function in the job. think woodrow wilson.

it calls for the vice-president and half the cabinet to initiate the process. people hand-picked by the president have to agree that he can't function. that does simply does not happen outside of blatantly obvious medical problems. even 60% strong disapproval ratings isn't enough.

as you note, removal via impeachment is markedly easier. if you can't get him removed via impeachment, you certainly can't get him removed via 25.4.

[gibraltar72]

7. Only hope we have is if big money tells Mitch it is over

They would drop him like a hot rock. But only if the money spigot was turned off.

[RB TexLa]

8. A unanimous vote by the cabinet and the vice president fully pushing for removal

And it's a different story.

I'm not saying that is going to happen but in that situation yes it could happen.

[no_hypocrisy]

9. Reminiscent of my experience with my father in his 90s who lacked his

former judgment. He stopped changing out of the T and boxers that he wore to bed. He stopped shaving and combing his hair. He looked and acted disheveled. His responses alarmed me and my siblings.

We discussed asking a court to either appoint a guardian or to admit him to a home.

But looking at the situation, we decided the mission was doomed to fail. That's because our father was a retired physician and you need two independent physicians to sign off. My father was so wellknown and respected, we couldn't imagine even getting one. Plus, while Dad was decidedly off, he could talk a good game. We were certain that he could fool a judge. Plus we would look like we were trying to get our hands on his money if we couldn't prove Dad needed safety from himself. (Four years prior, he had set fire to a room in our house, only to follow the firefighters back into the house while they were trying to put out the fire to get his meds.

So, trust me, I get it. You'll never get 2/3 in two Houses of Congress, let alone one.

[The Magistrate]

10. Quite Right, Ma'am

There is no mechanism for removing from office a person whose mind is malignantly unbalanced. Particularly not when that person enables a coherent faction that places its reactionary intentions far above patriotic loyalty to our country.

[First Speaker]

11. The 25th amendment has always been a disaster waiting to happen...

...the potential for chaos and confusion is almost unlimited. If a President and Vice-President turn on each other, we might get a situation analogous to the Wars of the Roses, or the Avignon Papacy--two "presidents", each claiming legitimacy and accusing the other of treason. It was very poorly thought out, in my view...and if anyone can unleash the chaos and confusion inherent in it, who else could it be but the current occupant of the White House...?