AP Syllabus focus:
‘The Twenty-Second Amendment set presidential term limits, reflecting public concern that too much time in office could expand presidential power.’
Presidential term limits are a constitutional response to fears that long-serving presidents could accumulate influence, weaken checks and balances, and blur republican government into something closer to personal rule.
What the Twenty-Second Amendment Does
The Twenty-Second Amendment limits how long an individual may serve as president, turning an informal norm into a binding constitutional rule.
Photograph of H.J. Res. 27 (March 24, 1947), the joint resolution through which Congress proposed what became the Twenty-Second Amendment. As a primary source, it connects the abstract idea of “term limits” to the constitutional amendment process in practice. It also underscores that limits on presidential tenure were implemented through formal, written law rather than relying solely on tradition. Source
Twenty-Second Amendment: A constitutional amendment (ratified 1951) limiting a president to two elected terms, with an additional rule for partial terms served after succession.
A president may be elected president no more than twice. If someone becomes president without being elected (for example, by succession) and serves more than two years of that term, they may be elected only once afterward (effectively a maximum of about 10 years total).
Why it Was Adopted
The amendment reflects the syllabus emphasis that it was driven by public concern that too much time in office could expand presidential power. Those concerns include:
Entrenchment: longer tenure can strengthen a president’s control over the executive branch and party networks.
Reduced electoral accountability: fewer competitive openings for the office may weaken democratic responsiveness.
Personalisation of power: extended incumbency can make politics revolve around an individual rather than institutions.
Pressure on other branches: a long-serving president may gain leverage over Congress and shape courts through repeated appointments.
Historical Context: From Norm to Constitutional Rule
Map of state action on the Twenty-Second Amendment, showing which states ratified (and when), rejected, or took no action. This visual reinforces that constitutional amendments require broad federalism-based consent, not just congressional passage. It also helps explain why the post–FDR push for term limits culminated in a formal nationwide rule rather than a continuing informal norm. Source
Before 1951, the two-term limit was a strong custom dating to George Washington, not a constitutional requirement. The custom was broken when Franklin D. Roosevelt won four elections (1932, 1936, 1940, 1944) during the Great Depression and World War II. After Roosevelt’s presidency, opponents argued that repeated re-election created opportunities for:
deeper influence over the bureaucracy through long-term leadership and policy direction
greater ability to set the national agenda and dominate public attention over time
multiple Supreme Court appointments, extending influence beyond a president’s own administration
Term Limits as a Check on Executive Power
The Twenty-Second Amendment functions as a structural check rather than a day-to-day constraint. It limits the time available for any one person to:
consolidate control over the executive branch
convert temporary popularity into long-term political dominance
repeatedly shape national institutions through appointments and sustained agenda-setting
Term limit: A legal restriction on the number of terms (or time) an officeholder may serve.
Ongoing Debates and Practical Effects
Term limits reduce the risk of a president becoming indispensable, but they also create trade-offs relevant to concerns about power:
Second-term dynamics: a re-elected president may have less electoral pressure, potentially encouraging bolder action, but also faces diminished leverage with Congress.
Lame-duck effects: when a president cannot run again, allies and opponents may discount future influence, shifting power toward other actors.
Continuity vs. turnover: limits ensure regular leadership change, but can reduce policy continuity during crises.
Incentives for legacy-building: presidents may prioritise lasting achievements within a fixed window, shaping how they use formal and informal powers.
The amendment does not eliminate presidential power; it addresses the specific fear that extended time in office can magnify it.
FAQ
No. A successor who serves $\leq 2$ years of a term can still be elected twice, totalling close to 10 years.
Yes, but only through the constitutional amendment process, requiring supermajorities and state ratification, which is politically difficult.
It created a legitimacy norm: stepping down signalled that the presidency was an office, not personal property, shaping expectations for over a century.
It can shift incentives toward legacy-setting, risk-taking, or executive unilateralism, because future electoral accountability is reduced.
Yes. The key is being “elected” twice, plus the “more than two years” rule for partial terms; it is not simply “two full terms, always.”
Practice Questions
(2 marks) Describe one way the Twenty-Second Amendment addresses concerns about presidential power.
1 mark: Identifies a correct feature (e.g., limits presidents to two elections / restricts total time in office).
1 mark: Links that feature to limiting accumulation/entrenchment of power over time.
(6 marks) Explain how the Twenty-Second Amendment reflects public concern about presidential power, and analyse one potential benefit and one potential drawback of imposing presidential term limits.
2 marks: Explains the concern (long tenure may entrench power, weaken checks, increase personal dominance).
2 marks: Analyses one benefit (e.g., regular turnover, prevents long-term consolidation, reinforces republican accountability).
2 marks: Analyses one drawback (e.g., lame-duck reduced influence, loss of experienced crisis leadership, short-termism/legacy focus).
