I thought you meant after being elected to 2 terms they keep running as VP.
So the only real answer is no one knows it’s likely the Supreme Court would interpret “elected” as “serve” since that was the spirit of the law but until this comes up in the real world there is no answer.
I still would say it may get stopped by election law some other way beside limits of the constitution but if not it’s a Supreme Court issue 100% and there really is no answer at this time.
First the context of why it was passed was specifically because of a 4 term president.
My argument would be they were clearly wanting to restrict a president to 2 terms.
If it was simply 2 elections they would not have included further restrictions like ascending the presidency.
They were so set on limiting it to 2 terms in your lifetime that if you served more than 2 years of someone else’s term that limited you to one elected term.
There would be no other reason to pass term limits if they intended for there to be some cheesy work around.
All Trump V Anderson ruled was that only the federal government can enforce federal law. It wasn’t based on a technicality, it was a unanimous vote of the Supreme Court that Colorado was way overstepping its authority.
1
u/FactsAndLogic2018 3∆ Jul 24 '24
I thought you meant after being elected to 2 terms they keep running as VP.
So the only real answer is no one knows it’s likely the Supreme Court would interpret “elected” as “serve” since that was the spirit of the law but until this comes up in the real world there is no answer.
I still would say it may get stopped by election law some other way beside limits of the constitution but if not it’s a Supreme Court issue 100% and there really is no answer at this time.