So, the 25th Amendment Then? Let’s Take A Look.

Earlier this week, Sen, Ed Markey (D-MA) called for Donald Trump to be removed from office via the process outlined in the 25th amendment to the Constitution. Since that time, I have received a few emails from readers asking me to start a campaign supporting Markey’s call to action.
Before we consider whether or not using the 25th amendment to remove Donald Trump from office is a good or a viable idea, let’s take a look at what the process actually is, shall we?
What is the 25th amendment?
The 25th amendment deals with presidential disability and succession, and was adopted on February 10, 1967. You can read the entire text of it here, at the National Constitution Center.
The amendment has four sections.
The first section states simply, “In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.”
The second section, which has actually been used twice (once in 1973 and again in 1974), deals with the event of a vacancy in the office of Vice President. This section states that, “Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.”
The third section allows for the president to temporary step down due to infirmity or other disability. It has been used four times, when presidents Reagan, Bush Jr. (who used it twice) and Biden underwent medical procedures. You may also remember it from a season-ending cliffhanger in The West Wing that was appropriately titled Twenty-Five.
The fourth section, which has never been used, is the one that Markey is referring to. This allows for the involuntary removal of a president from office. Here is what that section says:
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
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 unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
This is pretty dense, so I encourage you to read it multiple times before proceeding to the rest of this article.
According to the 25th amendment, who needs to agree to remove the president from office in order for it to actually happen?
Before answering this question, it is worth noting that there seem to be two possible scenarios here. The first would be if the president is entirely disabled, and the second is where the president may not be disabled but is removed anyway.
In the first scenario, here is who has to agree in order for the president to be removed:
The Vice President (in this case, J.D. Vance)
A majority of the department heads in the cabinet. While there are 26 cabinet members, the amendment only refers to the department heads. Right now, there are 15 of those.
Here is a list of the 15 current department heads, eight of whom would have to agree to remove Trump from office:
Secretary of State, Marco Rubio
Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessent
Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth
Attorney General, Pam Bondi
Secretary of the Interior, Doug Burgum
Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins
Secretary of Commerce, Howard Lutnick
Secretary of Labor, Lori Chavez-DeRemer
Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Scott Turner
Secretary of Transportation, Sean Duffy
Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright
Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Doug Collins
Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem
If 8 of those 15 plus J.D. Vance agrees, then Vance immediately assumes the duties and authority of the Office of the President. However, he would not actually become president, not just yet.
In the event that Trump is not actually incapacitated, and is instead removed for being deranged, then there is a third step. If Trump writes a letter to Congress stating that he can still carry out his duties, then Congress gets three weeks to decide the matter. At that point, removing Trump from office would require a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and the Senate.
So, is this going to happen?
(Sucks wind though teeth) Soooooo, yeeeaaahhhhh … never in a million years.
The process of involuntarily removing the president from office through the 25th amendment is actually quite a bit more onerous than the process of impeaching and convicting him. Here is a comparison:
Both require a two-thirds majority in the Senate;
Impeachment and conviction requires a simple majority in the House of Representatives, whereas the 25th amendment requires a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives;
Impeachment and conviction do not require the agreement of the Vice President, whereas the 25th amendment does require the agreement of the Vice President.
Impeachment and conviction do not require the agreement of any federal department heads, whereas the 25th amendment requires the agreement of eight federal department heads.
I’m on the record multiple times stating that Trump will never be removed from office via impeachment and conviction, so you won’t be surprised that I also don’t think there is any chance at all that he will be removed from office via this far more onerous method.
It is always better to accept reality.
I know that basically everyone reading this article strongly dislikes Donald Trump, and that is a sentiment I share. However, hoping for impossible things does not help you feel better.
As I argued last year in my Life in Activism article, “There Is Only One Way Out of Trump’s Second Term,” there is simply no shortcut out of the Trump presidency. You can’t change that. Instead, you need to accept it, and base your actions and expectations accordingly. That is a real path toward feeling better.
Please take advantage of our New Year’s Sale to become a paid subscriber to Bowers News Media and Wolves and Sheep for only $60/year. You will receive access to two paid articles per week, invites to our monthly political briefings, opportunities to ask us questions in our Ask Us Anything series, and the ability to post comments on our articles.



I despise Trump as POTUS! So, forgive me, when I say that it would be a waste of time for trying to utilize the 25th Amendment, or impeachment, to get rid of him. We tried impeachment twice, and it went nowhere. So, why is Senator Ed Markey pushing the 25th, and others pushing again for impeachment? I would guess for optics (as in it looks good), and it wastes time in congress (delaying tactic). This is why the midterms are so important. If (when) the Dems take back the House, and (possibly) the Senate, they will simply need to stall anything that Trump and the GOP try to do. Then, we grit our teeth, and gear up for 2028, and remind people that elections have grave consequences. If Kamala Harris had been elected in 2024, NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. In reality, delay is the best we have. It is called historically "muddling through". It is far better to have "muddling through" than full-fledged Fascism and the corruption that we now have.
Good analysis, Chris Bowers! One might add the further caveat that getting rid of Trump would leave us in the hands of J. D. Vance, a much more focused and calculating tool of the right wing billionaires.