Return to “The Rights” table of contents
The Founders’ Vision of the Presidency: A Limited Office
When the Founders wrote the U.S. Constitution, they deliberately created a weak executive branch, fearing a return to monarchy and dictatorship. Article II, which defines the presidency, contains only four sections, and one of those sections is entirely about how to impeach and remove the president if necessary. The Founders made clear that the president’s role was to faithfully execute the laws passed by Congress, not to make or rewrite laws by decree.
In sharp contrast, Article I, which outlines the role of Congress, is much longer and more detailed. It vests the bulk of governmental power in the legislative branch, which was meant to represent the people directly. Congress was given control over war powers, budgets, treaties, and national policy — areas that modern presidents have steadily seized from the legislative branch. The Founders never intended for the presidency to be the all-powerful office it has become today.
The Dangerous Expansion of Presidential Power
Presidential Overreach Under Trump and Beyond
Despite the clear limits envisioned by the Constitution, Donald Trump has led the most extreme expansion of presidential power in modern U.S. history. Not only has he claimed sweeping immunity from prosecution and accountability, but he has also disregarded the role of Congress and the judiciary, concentrating power in the White House in ways that deeply endanger democracy.
Using the Alien Enemies Act to Deport Without Due Process
President Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to begin deporting people without due process — a move that was immediately blocked by a federal judge as unconstitutional. Instead of complying with the judicial order, Trump defied the ruling and continued deportations, openly challenging the judiciary’s authority and setting a dangerous precedent that no president should be allowed to establish.
This is unconstitutional presidential overreach at its most dangerous: the president ignoring both Congress and the courts to act as an unchecked autocrat. This action alone shows why reforms cannot wait.
Congressional Fear and Failure to Act
A Cowed and Threatened Legislature
Throughout Trump’s presidency, Congress often failed to exercise its constitutional role as a check on executive power. Many lawmakers feared direct retaliation from Trump and his supporters, including personal threats and threats against their families. This fear paralyzed the legislative branch, even when it was clear that presidential actions violated the law and the Constitution.
The impeachment process — which the Founders designed as a critical check on abuse of power — was rendered ineffective by political intimidation and division. As a result, the presidency grew even more powerful and dangerous, moving further away from what the Founders intended
Why a Constitutional Amendment Is Needed
Restoring the Presidency to Its Original Limits
To reclaim the vision of a balanced government, we need a constitutional amendment that strips away unconstitutional presidential powers and immunities. This amendment must:
- Make the president fully accountable under the law, like every other citizen.
- Eliminate immunity for criminal and civil acts, whether committed before, during, or after holding office.
- Reassert Congressional control over war powers, spending, and national emergencies.
- Ensure the Department of Justice and law enforcement are independent from the White House, preventing misuse of federal power for personal or political gain.
By restructuring the presidency to align with Article II’s original limits, we can prevent future presidents — from any party — from ruling like monarchs.
The Need for a Citizen-Led Amendment Pathway
Making “We the People” the Ultimate Check on Power
However, reforming the presidency alone is not enough. As we have seen, when both Congress and the courts are unwilling or unable to act, there must be a direct way for the American people to intervene.
A Citizen-Led Amendment Pathway would give the people the power to propose and ratify constitutional amendments without requiring Congress to act. This would create a permanent and peaceful check on all three branches of government:
- If the president becomes too powerful, the people can act.
- If Congress refuses to do its job, the people can act.
- If the Supreme Court enables authoritarian rule, the people can act.
Returning to a True Democracy
The United States cannot claim to be a functioning democracy if one person can defy both Congress and the courts with no consequence. If we are to regain the trust of the American people and of other nations, we must restore our institutions to reflect true democratic principles, as envisioned by the Founders.
The Amendment
Preamble
In recognition that the President of the United States was never intended to exercise unchecked power, that recent history has shown dangerous abuses of executive authority, and that a stable democracy requires limits on the presidency, this Amendment clarifies and limits the scope of presidential powers to ensure that no person is above the law, that no President can unilaterally make war, and that the fundamental principles of checks and balances are restored and preserved.
SECTION 1
Presidential Immunity and Accountability
No person serving as President of the United States, or as Vice President, shall be immune from criminal or civil liability for acts committed before, during, or after their term of office. The President and Vice President may be indicted, tried, and convicted in federal or state courts while in office, and neither impeachment nor acquittal shall prevent subsequent criminal prosecution.
SECTION 2
Limitations on Executive Orders and Emergency Powers
a. Executive Orders issued by the President shall have no force of law beyond a period of one year, unless explicitly ratified by an Act of Congress.
b. The President may declare a national emergency for no longer than thirty (30) days, after which Congressional approval shall be required to extend such emergency.
c. No funds may be reallocated, transferred, or obligated by Executive Order or national emergency declaration without an Act of Congress.
d. Executive agreements with foreign nations shall expire after one year unless ratified as treaties by a two-thirds vote of the Senate.
SECTION 3
Limitation of Presidential Pardons
a. The President shall not have the power to grant pardons or reprieves for:
i. Any crime related to actions taken during the President’s term in office;
ii. Any crime committed by themselves, members of their family, or any person who served in their administration;
iii. Crimes of treason, sedition, war crimes, or obstruction of justice.
b. All presidential pardons shall be publicly disclosed and documented, including the rationale for the pardon, and are subject to judicial review to determine compliance with this section.
SECTION 4
Department of Justice Independence
a. The Attorney General shall be appointed by the President, confirmed by a majority vote of the Senate, and shall serve a fixed six-year term, removable only for cause, including proven misconduct or incapacity.
b. The Department of Justice and all subordinate agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall operate free from presidential interference in all investigations, prosecutions, and related matters.
c. Communications between the White House and the Department of Justice relating to specific criminal investigations or prosecutions must be disclosed to the public within 30 days, except where necessary to protect classified information.
SECTION 5
Appointments and Acting Officials
a. No person shall serve as an acting official in any position requiring Senate confirmation for more than 120 days without formal nomination and confirmation.
b. After 120 days, the position shall be considered vacant and may not be filled temporarily until the Senate confirms a nominee.
c. All senior law enforcement, intelligence, and national security appointments, including but not limited to the Attorney General, Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence, and FBI Director, shall require bipartisan Senate confirmation, with at least 55 affirmative votes to ensure broad support and public trust.
SECTION 7
Separation from Private and Foreign Influence
a. No private citizen shall serve in any official government capacity or exercise executive authority on behalf of the United States unless appointed and confirmed according to this Constitution.
b. The President, Vice President, and all members of the Executive Branch shall disclose all communications with foreign governments, officials, and entities to Congress within 30 days, except for classified matters, which shall be disclosed to the Congressional Intelligence Committees.
c. No private contracts, loans, gifts, or payments shall be accepted by the President, Vice President, or their immediate family from foreign governments or private entities during their term of office.
SECTION 8
Enforcement and Judicial Review
a. Any person may bring suit in federal court to challenge violations of this Amendment.
b. Federal courts shall give expedited consideration to all cases arising under this Amendment to ensure timely resolution.
c. Congress shall have the power to enforce this Amendment through appropriate legislation.
Common Questions
Why do we need an amendment to limit presidential power?
Presidential power has grown far beyond what the Founders intended. Recent actions — including presidents ignoring Congress and the courts — show that we need permanent constitutional limits to prevent abuse of power and preserve democracy.
Did the Founders want the president to be this powerful?
No. The Founders feared concentrated executive power. That’s why Article II (the presidency) is short and limited, while Article I (Congress) is long and detailed, giving most powers to the legislature.
Does this amendment take away all presidential power?
No. The president would still be able to enforce laws, manage agencies, and represent the nation, but without unchecked authority or immunity. The goal is balance, not weakness.
Why wasn’t the impeachment process enough to stop abuse?
Impeachment relies on Congress acting with courage, but recent events showed members were afraid of threats and violence. An amendment would set automatic limits and consequences, not left to politics.
What about emergencies? Won’t limiting presidential power make us unsafe?
Congress would retain emergency powers, and could authorize necessary action. But presidents could not act alone, preventing abuse under the false pretense of an “emergency.”
How would this affect the U.S. military and national security?
The military would return to being under Congressional control, preventing a president from using it for political purposes or as a private army. National security would be preserved through lawful means, not presidential decrees.
How would this amendment end presidential immunity?
To restore the rule of law, we must pass a constitutional amendment explicitly rejecting presidential immunity. The Presidential Accountability and Justice Independence Amendment would ensure that no president—past, present, or future—is ever above the law.
Key Provisions of the Amendment
- Whistleblower Protections – DOJ employees will be protected from retaliation if they report illegal or unethical directives from the president.
- No Presidential Immunity – A president is subject to criminal and civil liability before, during, and after their time in office.
- No Self-Pardons – A president cannot pardon themselves or use the pardon power to shield co-conspirators.
- Department of Justice Independence – The DOJ will have fixed terms for key officials, bipartisan confirmations, and strict oversight to prevent presidential interference.
- Transparency and Accountability – White House communications with the DOJ regarding criminal investigations must be publicly disclosed to prevent abuse.
What did the Supreme Court rule in 2024 regarding presidential immunity?
The Supreme Court ruled that a president has immunity from criminal prosecution for “official acts” performed while in office. This means that any crime a president commits under the guise of official duties could be shielded from prosecution.
It effectively places the president above the law, allowing them to commit crimes—such as election interference, abuse of power, or political persecution—without accountability. This paves the way for authoritarian rule.
Was presidential immunity always a thing?
No. Until this ruling, no president had absolute immunity. The Constitution does not grant it, and past presidents have faced investigations, lawsuits, and even impeachment for criminal conduct.
How does this ruling compare to other bad Supreme Court decisions?
It ranks alongside disastrous rulings like:
- Citizens United v. FEC (2010): Allowed unlimited corporate money in elections.
- Shelby County v. Holder (2013): Weakened voting rights protections.
Each of these decisions undermined democracy, and this ruling does the same by enabling a lawless presidency. - Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857): Upheld slavery.
Does the immunity ruling allow a president now commit crimes and get away with it?
Potentially, yes—if those crimes are deemed “official acts.” This means a president could order illegal actions, suppress opposition, or even engage in election fraud with little recourse.
Is presidential immunity in the Constitution?
No. The Constitution explicitly states that after impeachment, a president is still “liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishment, according to Law” (Article I, Section 3). The ruling contradicts this.
How does this ruling violate the separation of powers?
It gives the executive branch unchecked power, preventing Congress and the judiciary from holding a president accountable for criminal actions. This upsets the balance the Founders designed.
Can Congress override this Supreme Court ruling?
Not directly. However, Congress can pass laws limiting presidential immunity, though they would likely face legal challenges. A constitutional amendment is the strongest solution.
Does this ruling mean a president can’t be impeached anymore?
No, but it weakens impeachment as a tool. Even if Congress removes a president, criminal prosecution might be impossible, meaning there could be no legal consequences for wrongdoing.
What happens if a future president uses this ruling to justify extreme actions?
This ruling could allow a president to violate laws, weaponize the government against opponents, or even overturn elections—without fear of prosecution. It creates a dangerous precedent for authoritarian rule.
What is the purpose of the Presidential Accountability and Justice Independence Amendment?
It explicitly states that no president is above the law and that they can be prosecuted for crimes before, during, or after office. It also strengthens DOJ independence to prevent corruption.
What does the amendment say about presidential immunity?
It eliminates the concept entirely, stating that a president can be investigated, indicted, and prosecuted for any crime, whether official or personal.
How does the amendment prevent a corrupt DOJ?
It makes the DOJ independent from the president by:
- Giving the Attorney General a fixed 10-year term (so they don’t serve at the president’s pleasure).
- Requiring bipartisan Senate confirmation for key DOJ officials.
- Establishing a Congressional Oversight Commission to prevent executive interference.
- Protecting whistleblowers who expose presidential corruption.
Would this amendment prevent a president from pardoning themselves?
Yes. It explicitly bans self-pardons and prevents a president from using pardons to shield co-conspirators in crimes committed while in office.
Has the U.S. ever reversed a Supreme Court ruling with an amendment before?
Yes. For example:
- The 22nd Amendment limited presidents to two terms after FDR served four.
This proves that bad rulings can be undone with enough public and political support. - The 13th Amendment overturned the Dred Scott Ruling by abolishing slavery.
- The 26th Amendment overruled state laws that set the voting age higher than 18.
Could a future Supreme Court undo this amendment?
No. A constitutional amendment is the highest form of law in the U.S. Once ratified, the Supreme Court cannot overturn it.
What can ordinary citizens do to help pass this amendment?
- Contact their representatives and demand action.
- Support advocacy groups fighting for accountability.
- Spread awareness about the dangers of presidential immunity.
- Vote for leaders who prioritize democracy and rule of law.
Leave a Reply