TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Constitutional changes can allow leaders to remain in power indefinitely.

Fact Check: Constitutional changes can allow leaders to remain in power indefinitely.

Published July 2, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Fact Check: "Constitutional changes can allow leaders to remain in power indefinitely." ## What We Know The claim that constitutional changes can a...

Fact Check: "Constitutional changes can allow leaders to remain in power indefinitely."

What We Know

The claim that constitutional changes can allow leaders to remain in power indefinitely is rooted in discussions around potential amendments to the U.S. Constitution, particularly regarding presidential term limits. The 22nd Amendment, ratified in 1951, explicitly states that "no person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice" (source-3). However, there have been proposals to amend this amendment. For instance, H.J.Res.29, introduced in the 119th Congress, seeks to propose a constitutional amendment that would increase the number of times a person may be elected President (source-1). This indicates that while the current constitution limits presidential terms, there are mechanisms through which these limits could potentially be altered.

Moreover, discussions surrounding "Project 2025," a plan associated with Donald Trump and his supporters, suggest a desire to consolidate power and possibly undermine existing checks and balances (source-2, source-5). Trump's own comments about considering ways to serve a third term further highlight the ongoing discourse about potential changes to presidential term limits (source-3).

Analysis

The evidence suggests that while the current constitutional framework imposes term limits on the presidency, there are ongoing discussions and proposals that could lead to changes in this regard. The introduction of H.J.Res.29 indicates a legislative effort to modify the existing rules, which could theoretically allow a president to serve more than two terms if such an amendment were to pass (source-1).

However, the likelihood of such an amendment passing is uncertain, as it requires significant political consensus and is subject to rigorous scrutiny. Constitutional law experts, such as Jeremy Paul from Northeastern University, have stated that there are "no credible legal arguments" for circumventing the 22nd Amendment without a formal amendment process (source-3).

The sources discussing "Project 2025" also raise concerns about the implications of such changes, suggesting that they could undermine democratic norms and checks and balances (source-5). This indicates a potential risk of leaders attempting to extend their power indefinitely if constitutional changes were made.

Conclusion

The claim that constitutional changes can allow leaders to remain in power indefinitely is Partially True. While the current constitutional framework does impose term limits, there are proposals and discussions that could lead to changes in these limits. However, the feasibility of such changes is highly uncertain and would require significant political will and public support. Additionally, the legal and democratic implications of such changes are contentious and would likely face substantial opposition.

Sources

  1. H.J.Res.29 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): Proposing an ...
  2. Subject-by-Subject Breakdown of Trump's Project 2025
  3. Trump says he’s considering ways to serve a third term as ...
  4. La Stampa - Ultime notizie di cronaca e news dall'Italia e dal mondo
  5. Project 2025 Would Destroy the U.S. System of Checks ...
  6. Torino: notizie di cronaca e sport - La Stampa
  7. How Donald Trump could remain president of the United ...
  8. Esteri: le ultime notizie dall'Europa e dal mondo - La Stampa

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Trump has the constitutional power to ignore laws that interfere with his duties.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Trump has the constitutional power to ignore laws that interfere with his duties.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Trump has the constitutional power to ignore laws that interfere with his duties.

Jul 8, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Wisconsin does not allow citizens to initiate constitutional amendments via ballot measures.
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Wisconsin does not allow citizens to initiate constitutional amendments via ballot measures.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Wisconsin does not allow citizens to initiate constitutional amendments via ballot measures.

Jul 3, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: George Soros and the Open Society Foundations (OSF): They have been the leading donors to the Democratic Party over the past 15+ years. They have been the leading funders behind Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa "terrorist riots." They have funded campaigns of dozens of corrupt judges, District Attorneys (DAs), and Attorneys General (AGs). Soros has publicly stated his intention to dismantle the American constitutional republic. The Democratic Party is aligned with this anti-American agenda.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: George Soros and the Open Society Foundations (OSF): They have been the leading donors to the Democratic Party over the past 15+ years. They have been the leading funders behind Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa "terrorist riots." They have funded campaigns of dozens of corrupt judges, District Attorneys (DAs), and Attorneys General (AGs). Soros has publicly stated his intention to dismantle the American constitutional republic. The Democratic Party is aligned with this anti-American agenda.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: George Soros and the Open Society Foundations (OSF): They have been the leading donors to the Democratic Party over the past 15+ years. They have been the leading funders behind Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa "terrorist riots." They have funded campaigns of dozens of corrupt judges, District Attorneys (DAs), and Attorneys General (AGs). Soros has publicly stated his intention to dismantle the American constitutional republic. The Democratic Party is aligned with this anti-American agenda.

Aug 18, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Jasmine Crockett schooled Mike Johnson on his constitutional law arguments
Partially True

Fact Check: Jasmine Crockett schooled Mike Johnson on his constitutional law arguments

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Jasmine Crockett schooled Mike Johnson on his constitutional law arguments

Jul 19, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: New Caledonia's independence is hindered by France's constitutional amendments.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: New Caledonia's independence is hindered by France's constitutional amendments.

Jul 13, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks
Fact Check: Constitutional changes can allow leaders to remain in power indefinitely. | TruthOrFake Blog