So, here's a thing that happens in American politics every so often: someone suggests maybe we should use the 25th Amendment. It's like the constitutional equivalent of suggesting your friend might need a nap—a serious, last-resort kind of nap. This Easter, the suggestion came back, and it was aimed at former President Donald Trump.
The trigger was an Easter social media post from Trump. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) took to X on Sunday and didn't mince words. He characterized the post as "utterly unhinged." Then he got to the point. "If I were in Trump's Cabinet, I would spend Easter calling constitutional lawyers about the 25th Amendment," Murphy wrote. He voiced serious concerns, stating, "He's already killed thousands. He's going to kill thousands more."
He wasn't alone. Democratic Representative Yassamin Ansari shared the sentiment, stating, "The 25th Amendment exists for a reason." And Democratic Representative Melanie Stansbury chimed in too, declaring, "The emperor has no clothes. Time for the #25thAmendment. Congress and the Cabinet must act."
What Is This 25th Amendment Thing, Anyway?
Let's take a quick constitutional detour. The 25th Amendment is the rulebook for what happens if a president can't do the job. It was drafted after President John F. Kennedy's assassination and ratified in 1967. It covers presidential succession—who takes over if the president dies, resigns, or is removed. The part everyone talks about in moments like these is Section 4, which deals with involuntary removal. It allows the vice president and a majority of the cabinet to declare the president "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office." It's a big deal, and it's generally considered a last-resort measure.
Other parts of the amendment get used more routinely. Section 2 was first used by Richard Nixon in 1973 to appoint a new vice president after Spiro Agnew resigned. Section 3 is for when a president voluntarily steps aside temporarily, like for a medical procedure. Ronald Reagan invoked it informally in 1985, and George W. Bush formally applied it in 2002 and 2007. Most recently, in 2021, President Joe Biden invoked Section 3, temporarily transferring power to then-Vice President Kamala Harris while he underwent a procedure.
Democrats have floated the idea of using Section 4 against Trump before, notably after the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. It's a recurring theme.
Why Now? The Iran Threat
The latest round of 25th Amendment chatter didn't come out of nowhere. It followed some particularly strong rhetoric from Trump directed at Iran. On Sunday, he warned Iran of severe consequences if it did not open the Strait of Hormuz before a deadline. "Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran," he wrote.
This kind of talk drew criticism from across the political spectrum. Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican, criticized Trump on Easter, stating he has "gone insane" and urged officials in his administration to intervene amid escalating tensions. On the other side, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) called Trump "dangerous and mentally unbalanced" over the Iran situation and urged Congress to end the conflict.
So, to sum up: a holiday, a social media post, some stark warnings to a foreign nation, and suddenly everyone in Washington is talking about the constitutional process for declaring a president unfit. It's a dramatic escalation of political rhetoric, centered on a provision of the Constitution that is designed for moments of genuine crisis. Whether this qualifies, and whether anyone in Trump's circle would ever actually consider such a move, is the multi-billion dollar question. For now, it's just talk—but in American politics, talk has a way of becoming something more.
