Rep. Maxine Waters called for the 25th Amendment to be invoked against President Trump “to determine his unfitness,” saying it should be used “to determine that something’s wrong with this president.”

Representative Maxine Waters has publicly called for the invocation of the 25th Amendment against President Donald Trump. Her remarks focused on concerns about the president’s mental and emotional stability while in office. Waters suggested that the 25th Amendment should be utilized as a mechanism to evaluate whether President Trump is fit to continue serving, emphasizing that it was designed precisely for such circumstances.

In her statement, Waters asserted that the amendment provides a constitutional process for addressing situations where a sitting president may be incapable of fulfilling the duties of the office. She emphasized that this was not just a political move but a necessary step to protect the nation from potential harm due to what she perceives as erratic or dangerous behavior. According to her, “something’s wrong with this president,” and the country must take it seriously.

The 25th Amendment allows for the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet to declare the president unfit, triggering a transfer of power. Waters’ call to action added to a growing chorus of lawmakers and public figures who, at various points in Trump’s presidency, raised concerns about his conduct and decision-making. Her statement is part of a broader conversation around the limits of presidential power and the checks and balances built into the U.S. Constitution.

Critics of Waters’ remarks argue that calls to invoke the 25th Amendment can appear politically motivated and might set a dangerous precedent if used loosely. They caution that the process should be reserved for clear and undeniable instances of incapacity, rather than political disagreements or controversial rhetoric. Nevertheless, her comments highlight the level of concern among some lawmakers regarding Trump’s actions while in office.

Overall, Waters’ statement underscores ongoing debates over presidential accountability and mental fitness. Whether or not the 25th Amendment was a realistic path forward, her remarks reflect the intensity of political divisions during Trump’s presidency and the ongoing struggle to navigate constitutional tools in times of perceived crisis.