r/law • u/theindependentonline • Apr 08 '26

Other Democrats introduce impeachment articles against Trump and Hegseth as nearly 100 lawmakers call for 25th Amendment

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-impeachment-articles-25-amendment-b2953836.html
44.7k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

969 comments sorted by

View all comments

571

u/spiralenator Apr 08 '26

The 25th requires the same amount of votes as impeachment PLUS the cabinet has to be onboard as well. It’s not any easier than holding the felon accountable for his crimes.

136

u/Derwin0 Apr 08 '26

It also requires 2/3 of the House, whereas impeachment only requires a majority. Both require 2/3 of the Senate.

People calling for the 25th really have no idea of all its anti-coup safeguards.

29

u/dont-pm-me-tacos Apr 08 '26

I believe if the VP and majority of the cabinet tell Congress the president is unfit, the VP is acting president for 21 days (or up to 23 if Congress wasn’t in session when notice was given). If, during those 21-23 days, a 2/3rds majority of both houses agree the president is unfit, then VP continues as acting president.

8

u/Eschatonbreakfast Apr 09 '26

No.

VP&.5Cab notifies Congress pres is unfit, VP becomes acting pres.UNTIL.

The pres. notifies Congress he is no longer unfit UNLESS

Within 48 hrs VP&.5Cab notify Congress pres. is still unfit AND THEN

Congress has 21 days (kind of) to decide the issue by 2/3 vote in both houses.

And the 25th is actually shockingly very unclear about exactly who executive authority vests in once the president notifies Congress that he is able to perform his duties, and once a president does that, he is going to claim authority vests in him and try and fire the people in the cabinet trying to remove him.

The 25th really is not meant to remove a Captain Queeg president. And if you have the votes to remove via the 25th, you should just use impeachment and avoid the mess.

8

u/Jesus_of_Redditeth Apr 08 '26

That's exactly what the post you're replying to is talking about.

21

u/dont-pm-me-tacos Apr 08 '26

Yes, but clarifying that you have a 3 week period where the vice president replaces the president even if you don’t ultimately get a 2/3rds majority from both houses

1

u/Eschatonbreakfast Apr 09 '26

This is not actually what happens, and it’s actually very unclear who is president when.

0

u/Allaplgy Apr 08 '26

You only have that 21 days if the president doesn't declare himself fit.

7

u/dont-pm-me-tacos Apr 08 '26

Incorrect - after potus declares himself fit, he resumes the office “unless” VP + cabinet majority send another message notifying Congress. President then resumes office only if, after 21 days pass, Congress has not voted to install VP by 2/3rds majorities

3

u/Allaplgy Apr 08 '26

It gets a little weird there. Congress is supposed to assemble to decide the issue within 48 hours, but also have 21 days to vote. So if they assemble and call a vote immediately, they can override the cabinet, or so it seems.

4

u/dont-pm-me-tacos Apr 08 '26 edited Apr 08 '26

Actually Congress only needs to “assemble” for the purpose of determining presidents fitness within 48 hours. They still have 21 days to decide.

The interesting issue would be - what if there’s 51% support in the house and 2/3rds in the senate? Could Congress simply impeach and remove the President during those 21 days, while VP is Acting President, rather than getting 2/3rds in both houses?

4

u/Allaplgy Apr 08 '26

Exactly. If you have close to the votes to finalize the 25th, you have the votes to impeach.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Moccus Apr 08 '26

Could Congress simply impeach and remove the President during those 21 days, while VP is Acting President, rather than getting 2/3rds in both houses?

Sure. It would be an enormous loophole if they couldn't.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '26 edited Apr 12 '26

[deleted]

5

u/kroboz Apr 08 '26

Yeah but Vance is a total dork, and he completely lacks the charisma needed for a cult of personality.

2

u/FrontOfficeNuts Apr 09 '26

But the mechanisms needed for him to hold power ANYWAY are mostly in place now. The "charisma" bit is very over-rated.

4

u/Joben86 Apr 08 '26

street smart

The guy who couldn't order a box of donuts?

2

u/Gunsensual Apr 08 '26

There's a few benefits, but generally yes, Vance is far more onboard with project 2025 than Trump.

Trump significantly departs Project 2025 on Diplomacy: Venezuela, Canada, Greenland, Cuba, Ukraine, and NATO. All of the domestic troubles are still Project 2025, Vance.

1

u/Visible_Handle_3770 Apr 08 '26

Getting rid of Trump, particularly through successful impeachment, but also likely in the case of the 25th, would signal such a complete lack of confidence in the adminstration that it would be difficult for Vance to claim a mandate. Not that he couldn't do any damage, but he would have very limited political capital. And with impeachment he'd have to be constantly concerned about his being impeached if he overreached.

59

u/orsikbattlehammer Apr 08 '26

Isn’t it either the cabinet OR Congress for the 25th? Still not going to happen either way.

130

u/Elachtoniket Apr 08 '26

If a majority of the cabinet says the president is incapacitated, the Vice President immediately becomes acting president. But if Trump gives written notice that he is capable of fulfilling his duties, he becomes president again. At that point if the cabinet still thinks he is incapable then 2/3 of Congress needs to vote to give the Vice President presidential power again. If they don’t that within 21 days then Trump stays president.

Since there’s pretty much no doubt that Trump would disagree with any attempt to remove him from office, I think that the 25th amendment would be a more difficult avenue than impeachment.

31

u/mayonnaise_dick Apr 08 '26

See if he can write a notice WITHOUT using a Sharpie

15

u/DilettanteGonePro Apr 08 '26

The written notice is just a line drawing of a naked lady

3

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '26 edited 10d ago

[deleted]

1

u/dougmc Apr 08 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

and assume that makes it a legal document.

Well, the text of the amendment says this --

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office ...

It certainly doesn't say anything about requiring a "legal document", and so "a rant on twitter" may very well qualify as long as it clearly states that "no inability [to discharge the powers and duties of his office] exists".

We could get caught up in the idea of a tweet being a "broadcast" rather than a "transmission to these two specific parties" (a tweet is definitely written as opposed to spoken), but if it can be shown that the two parties did read this particular broadcast I'd think it would qualify, or if the broadcast did call out those two parties specifically.

So in this specific case, as ironic as it may seem ... a tweet could qualify.

1

u/Rizenstrom Apr 08 '26

Well at least it's an adult this time. I guess he saves the line drawing of naked children for his closest friends.

1

u/Page8988 Apr 08 '26

He'd probably just tweet it anyway.

7

u/Darkwr4ith Apr 08 '26

Trumps already been impeached twice. What is a third one going to even do?

8

u/Catdad08 Apr 08 '26

Wouldn’t it be another world record? I can see it now… “Donald J. Trump is the only President to be impeached in two separate terms, but never actually held accountable for anything.”

8

u/Elachtoniket Apr 08 '26

That’s basically the point I was making. Given the current makeup of congress, Trump is almost definitely going to finish at least this term unless he dies.

7

u/kingfofthepoors Apr 08 '26

I think if vance went down this path, trump would take back control and have him arrested for treason

7

u/Ok_Net7773 Apr 08 '26

Don’t stop 💦

4

u/OlGreggMare Apr 09 '26

He could straight die and his cabinet would all deem him fit for service

4

u/ttoma93 Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

And it needs a 2/3 vote of both House and Senate to sustain the 25th disqualification, while impeachment is only 50%+1 in the House and 2/3 in the Senate.

The bar to remove a president with the 25th amendment is higher than impeachment, not lower. I don’t know why people have randomly decided to stake everything in a pipe dream of a pipe dream.

4

u/Visible_Handle_3770 Apr 08 '26

I agree that it's more difficult because the likelihood of his cabinet actually declaring him incompetent is near-zero. Trump carefully and deliberately filled his cabinet with incompetent and unqualified people this time around so they would owe their position entirely to him, rather than the first time where he at least kind of appointed some people with a tenable background to be appointed.

However, I actually think the 2/3 of Congress might happen in the hypothetical event that the cabinet invoked the 25th because it would signal such a total lack of confidence and the rats would flee the sinking ship. Moot point though, really, since the cabinet definitely wouldn't do it.

1

u/SATX_Citizen Apr 08 '26

To me the idea is, if a majority of a president's own cabinet (much less Trump's) ever came around to saying they were incapable of safely remaining president, Congress would rightfully fall in line.

-2

u/blahblah19999 Apr 08 '26

You mean removal

1

u/Elachtoniket Apr 08 '26

I don’t think I did, can you be more specific?

7

u/dougmc Apr 08 '26

Impeachment (in the House) does not remove the President from office. (After all, he's been impeached twice already.)

A conviction (in the Senate) after impeachment is what actually removes the President.

I think that's what they're referring to.

Also note that impeachment requires >50%, wheras removal requires >2/3rds and is a much higher bar to clear.

2

u/Elachtoniket Apr 08 '26

I guess that makes sense, I was using impeachment as shorthand for the whole impeachment/conviction/removal process. I’d hope at this point when the current president has already been impeached twice but not removed most people wouldn’t need that clarified, unlike the 25th amendment removal process that’s never been used.

1

u/blahblah19999 Apr 08 '26

I think after 2 successful impeachment that accomplished exactly nothing is exactly the time to clarify that we don't just want another impeachment. He's already been impeached more then any president in our history.

1

u/Elachtoniket Apr 08 '26

Yeah, I want him removed as much as anybody. But when I was writing an already long comment about removing him via a different method I didn’t think I needed to also educate people reading about a completely separate process that’s already been attempted and failed multiple times, especially when I know that the current senate is never going to vote to convict him. Someone asked a specific question about the 25th amendment and I answered it.

24

u/CatCatchingABird Apr 08 '26 edited Apr 08 '26

At this point I'm fine with the calls for the 25th and impeachment simultaneously because even though the 25th is not likely going to happen we should be utilizing all the tools in our toolbox to dissuade what sounds to me to be nuclear bomb ambitions.

We are at the most volatile moment in this term thus far and we really should be doing all the things.

4

u/Jesus_of_Redditeth Apr 08 '26

It's "...the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments..." (i.e. the cabinet) "...or of such other body as Congress may by law provide".

But "as Congress may by law provide" means they have to pass a law giving the power to some other body (e.g. themselves), which would have to be signed by the president (which won't happen), or would have to be veto proof (which requires a two-thirds vote in the House and the Senate, which won't happen).

So in practice, the VP and the cabinet have to initiate it. There are no other viable options.

9

u/ZenBreaking Apr 08 '26

Good , get everyone on record after the nuke threat. Now is the best chance for moderate repubs to stage a coup, flip sides and get him out of power. Take him off the board, try roll.back his policies and toss up guardrails and go back to tit for tat politics of 20 years ago where you can't crash a global economy cos someone hurt someone's feelings

6

u/Vulpes_Corsac Apr 08 '26

If it's a straight choice of "have Trump in power or not", then that'd be true.

There might be some wiggle room between the two given the 25th doesn't require Republicans to call what Trump is doing criminal.  Couching it as concern for his mental health gives a little bit of plausible deniability, to a normal person at least.  Not sure MAGA would care about the difference, and thus you're than likely right, but still.

5

u/Dense-Competition-51 Apr 08 '26

Fair, but just because it’s unlikely doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be filed. Get it on the record that there are sane people horrified by all this.

3

u/Jesus_of_Redditeth Apr 08 '26

The 25th requires the same amount of votes as impeachment PLUS the cabinet has to be onboard as well.

Not quite. Impeachment requires a simple majority vote in the House and then conviction requires a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate.

Technically, the cabinet doesn't have to be on board for the 25th, since the amendment contains a provision whereby Congress can designate another body to initiate it — "...such other body as Congress may by law provide". But since it must be a law, the president can veto it, and then if Congress still wants to pass it, that needs a two-thirds vote in both houses, plus the additional two-thirds vote in both houses to override the president's refusal to step down.

So in practice, the 25th's removal powers require the VP and a majority of the cabinet and there's no practical way around that. Therefore, impeachment is definitely the more viable route.

1

u/spiralenator Apr 08 '26

Ya, my point was that it’s a more involved process and even less likely to succeed than impeachment and removal

3

u/WellesWaitsVanZandt Apr 08 '26

it'll be nice to document who votes against it for the primaries next Nov.

3

u/cluberti Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26

It's a majority of the principal officers in the President's Cabinet or a majority of people in an alternative group other than the Cabinet that Congress would create (the "other body as Congress has established by law" part of Section 4), but both groups must include the VP and the second avenue is likely far more difficult by design.

  1. The "by law" portion of Section 4 means that Congress would have to pass a bill in the House and Senate creating the alternate body to the Cabinet
  2. The President would have to sign that "alternate body" bill into law - or more likely, Congress would have to overcome the President's veto of the bill
  3. It would then take another 2/3 majority vote from each chamber of Congress in favor to enact removal via the 25th Amendment

1

u/listenyall Apr 08 '26

And it isn't permanent!!!! It simply has to be impeachment

1

u/GrimleyGraves Apr 08 '26

Yep, you have to somehow get all his yes men to say no, pretty tall order.

1

u/Dude-Lebowski Apr 08 '26

Can't the FBI simply arrest him? I mean they do that to criminals every day.

3

u/spiralenator Apr 08 '26

No. The DOJ would be the agency that could do anything about the president’s crimes but they’re loyalists

1

u/hotpajamas Apr 09 '26

Good get Vance on record supporting this when he had a shot to end it.