Is there a way for presidents to legally extend their terms beyond the maximum of four years?Proper use of the word 'term' for U.S. Presidents, andWhy is the Supreme Court not balanced in terms of their political views?Can the current President of the United States block the transfer of their office to the next elected president?Has the way Unemployment is measured changed in the last 8 years?Is there any evidence that different length terms-of-office would be more effective for a President w.r.t. global policy?Is there a way the US president could extend his immunity in the future?Is there a legal way that can be used to force the President of United States undergo a mental health examination?Is there a tendency for presidents to come from outside of “big politics” in recent years?Is there a maximum period for declassification of information in US?Does a (US) presidential proclamation have a time limit?

Miss Toad and her frogs

Is this hogweed?

Different budgets within roommate group

One folder two different locations on ubuntu 18.04

Acceleration in Circular motion

Is there a category where products don't exist because uniqueness fails?

Which centaur is more 'official'?

Should I report a leak of confidential HR information?

What is "oversubscription" in Networking?

Sum of Parts of An Array - JavaScript

Loss of majority in Westminster

Why did this meteor appear cyan?

Can you sign using a digital signature itself?

Why does a brace command group need spaces after the opening brace in POSIX Shell Grammar?

Can Access Fault Exceptions of the MC68040 caused by internal access faults occur in normal situations?

The Confused Alien

Why do I need two parameters in an HTTP parameter pollution attack?

How can I convince my reader that I will not use a certain trope?

I hit a pipe with a mower and now it won't turn

Prime parity peregrination

Can a single server be associated with multiple domains?

Is it bad to describe a character long after their introduction?

Spicket or spigot?

What exactly is a fey/fiend/celestial spirit?



Is there a way for presidents to legally extend their terms beyond the maximum of four years?


Proper use of the word 'term' for U.S. Presidents, andWhy is the Supreme Court not balanced in terms of their political views?Can the current President of the United States block the transfer of their office to the next elected president?Has the way Unemployment is measured changed in the last 8 years?Is there any evidence that different length terms-of-office would be more effective for a President w.r.t. global policy?Is there a way the US president could extend his immunity in the future?Is there a legal way that can be used to force the President of United States undergo a mental health examination?Is there a tendency for presidents to come from outside of “big politics” in recent years?Is there a maximum period for declassification of information in US?Does a (US) presidential proclamation have a time limit?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








5















If I remember correctly in one Episode of Stargate SG-1, the president of the United States declares some state of national emergency (world was attacked by aliens) and was able to suspend elections, weaseling around the 22nd Amendment and being able to stay in office indefinitely by keeping up the emergency state.



Is it actually possible for the president stay in office longer than the usual four years or even forever, by using some (basically) legal tricks?










share|improve this question









New contributor



Takiro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

























    5















    If I remember correctly in one Episode of Stargate SG-1, the president of the United States declares some state of national emergency (world was attacked by aliens) and was able to suspend elections, weaseling around the 22nd Amendment and being able to stay in office indefinitely by keeping up the emergency state.



    Is it actually possible for the president stay in office longer than the usual four years or even forever, by using some (basically) legal tricks?










    share|improve this question









    New contributor



    Takiro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















      5












      5








      5








      If I remember correctly in one Episode of Stargate SG-1, the president of the United States declares some state of national emergency (world was attacked by aliens) and was able to suspend elections, weaseling around the 22nd Amendment and being able to stay in office indefinitely by keeping up the emergency state.



      Is it actually possible for the president stay in office longer than the usual four years or even forever, by using some (basically) legal tricks?










      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Takiro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      If I remember correctly in one Episode of Stargate SG-1, the president of the United States declares some state of national emergency (world was attacked by aliens) and was able to suspend elections, weaseling around the 22nd Amendment and being able to stay in office indefinitely by keeping up the emergency state.



      Is it actually possible for the president stay in office longer than the usual four years or even forever, by using some (basically) legal tricks?







      united-states president presidential-term






      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Takiro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.










      share|improve this question









      New contributor



      Takiro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 2 hours ago









      Brythan

      75.2k8 gold badges163 silver badges256 bronze badges




      75.2k8 gold badges163 silver badges256 bronze badges






      New contributor



      Takiro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      asked 8 hours ago









      TakiroTakiro

      262 bronze badges




      262 bronze badges




      New contributor



      Takiro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




      New contributor




      Takiro is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          7














          The short answer is no. The longer answer is that this framing isn't particularly helpful.



          There are a number of overlapping factors that prevent the president from legally suspending elections like some tinpot dictator. In particular Article II Section I of the Constitution and the 12th, 20th, 22nd, and 25th amendments which combine to define presidential elections and succession.



          Terms ending are not directly linked to elections being held. Even if elections could not be held for some catastrophic reason, the president should still leave office at the end of their term according to the line of succession (if no elections occurred at all many of their terms will have ended at the same time, but there should be a President Pro Tempore of the Senate because Senate terms are staggered). This is all theoretical since it's never been tested and hopefully never will be.



          Perhaps an even more boring reason why the president cannot simply suspend presidential elections is that the federal government does not run elections. The state governments do. A state government may have the ability to suspend or reschedule an election, and there are rules in place for if a state fails to make a selection on the prescribed day. If they still haven't named electors in time for the meeting of the Electoral College, that state will simply not cast any votes.



          The only legal way around any of this would be modifying the Constitution. Because of course you can make anything 'legal' if you change the definition of what 'legal' means.



          At the end of the day though, the real world isn't a game. Even if you could find some obscure and bizarre legal loophole to override precedent, the law isn't a set of magic rules. Its just rules that we made up. Nobody would have to accept it. A democratic government governs with the consent of the people. Attempting to use force to subvert the will of the people would be how a president becomes a dictator.






          share|improve this answer




















          • 1





            +lots for "the law isn't a set of magic rules". This simple fact is often overlooked.

            – James K
            4 hours ago











          • "the law isn't a set of magic rules" - also why the peaceful transition of power is not guaranteed, though it's happened many times over. If a President didn't want to leave and they had the support of the military, it would be tough to do much about it.

            – David Rice
            3 hours ago


















          4














          The Constitution sets a presidential term at 4 years, and the 22nd amendment pretty firmly sets a two-term maximum:




          No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once...




          Since this was a Constitutional amendment, there is no legal way to extend a presidential term after 8 years (or technically 10 if you were a VP-turned-Pres mid-term) without passing a new amendment to allow it. This applies even if elections themselves are suspended for an emergency - the president's term is up when it's up, regardless of whether there's anyone else to take up the office.



          Whether or not there's a illegal but effective way to stay president after two terms would be pure speculation.






          share|improve this answer

























          • There is a legal way: convince the congress and at least 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution.

            – phoog
            6 hours ago











          • @phoog Fair point. I added that qualifier.

            – Bobson
            6 hours ago













          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "475"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );






          Takiro is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f42427%2fis-there-a-way-for-presidents-to-legally-extend-their-terms-beyond-the-maximum-o%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          7














          The short answer is no. The longer answer is that this framing isn't particularly helpful.



          There are a number of overlapping factors that prevent the president from legally suspending elections like some tinpot dictator. In particular Article II Section I of the Constitution and the 12th, 20th, 22nd, and 25th amendments which combine to define presidential elections and succession.



          Terms ending are not directly linked to elections being held. Even if elections could not be held for some catastrophic reason, the president should still leave office at the end of their term according to the line of succession (if no elections occurred at all many of their terms will have ended at the same time, but there should be a President Pro Tempore of the Senate because Senate terms are staggered). This is all theoretical since it's never been tested and hopefully never will be.



          Perhaps an even more boring reason why the president cannot simply suspend presidential elections is that the federal government does not run elections. The state governments do. A state government may have the ability to suspend or reschedule an election, and there are rules in place for if a state fails to make a selection on the prescribed day. If they still haven't named electors in time for the meeting of the Electoral College, that state will simply not cast any votes.



          The only legal way around any of this would be modifying the Constitution. Because of course you can make anything 'legal' if you change the definition of what 'legal' means.



          At the end of the day though, the real world isn't a game. Even if you could find some obscure and bizarre legal loophole to override precedent, the law isn't a set of magic rules. Its just rules that we made up. Nobody would have to accept it. A democratic government governs with the consent of the people. Attempting to use force to subvert the will of the people would be how a president becomes a dictator.






          share|improve this answer




















          • 1





            +lots for "the law isn't a set of magic rules". This simple fact is often overlooked.

            – James K
            4 hours ago











          • "the law isn't a set of magic rules" - also why the peaceful transition of power is not guaranteed, though it's happened many times over. If a President didn't want to leave and they had the support of the military, it would be tough to do much about it.

            – David Rice
            3 hours ago















          7














          The short answer is no. The longer answer is that this framing isn't particularly helpful.



          There are a number of overlapping factors that prevent the president from legally suspending elections like some tinpot dictator. In particular Article II Section I of the Constitution and the 12th, 20th, 22nd, and 25th amendments which combine to define presidential elections and succession.



          Terms ending are not directly linked to elections being held. Even if elections could not be held for some catastrophic reason, the president should still leave office at the end of their term according to the line of succession (if no elections occurred at all many of their terms will have ended at the same time, but there should be a President Pro Tempore of the Senate because Senate terms are staggered). This is all theoretical since it's never been tested and hopefully never will be.



          Perhaps an even more boring reason why the president cannot simply suspend presidential elections is that the federal government does not run elections. The state governments do. A state government may have the ability to suspend or reschedule an election, and there are rules in place for if a state fails to make a selection on the prescribed day. If they still haven't named electors in time for the meeting of the Electoral College, that state will simply not cast any votes.



          The only legal way around any of this would be modifying the Constitution. Because of course you can make anything 'legal' if you change the definition of what 'legal' means.



          At the end of the day though, the real world isn't a game. Even if you could find some obscure and bizarre legal loophole to override precedent, the law isn't a set of magic rules. Its just rules that we made up. Nobody would have to accept it. A democratic government governs with the consent of the people. Attempting to use force to subvert the will of the people would be how a president becomes a dictator.






          share|improve this answer




















          • 1





            +lots for "the law isn't a set of magic rules". This simple fact is often overlooked.

            – James K
            4 hours ago











          • "the law isn't a set of magic rules" - also why the peaceful transition of power is not guaranteed, though it's happened many times over. If a President didn't want to leave and they had the support of the military, it would be tough to do much about it.

            – David Rice
            3 hours ago













          7












          7








          7







          The short answer is no. The longer answer is that this framing isn't particularly helpful.



          There are a number of overlapping factors that prevent the president from legally suspending elections like some tinpot dictator. In particular Article II Section I of the Constitution and the 12th, 20th, 22nd, and 25th amendments which combine to define presidential elections and succession.



          Terms ending are not directly linked to elections being held. Even if elections could not be held for some catastrophic reason, the president should still leave office at the end of their term according to the line of succession (if no elections occurred at all many of their terms will have ended at the same time, but there should be a President Pro Tempore of the Senate because Senate terms are staggered). This is all theoretical since it's never been tested and hopefully never will be.



          Perhaps an even more boring reason why the president cannot simply suspend presidential elections is that the federal government does not run elections. The state governments do. A state government may have the ability to suspend or reschedule an election, and there are rules in place for if a state fails to make a selection on the prescribed day. If they still haven't named electors in time for the meeting of the Electoral College, that state will simply not cast any votes.



          The only legal way around any of this would be modifying the Constitution. Because of course you can make anything 'legal' if you change the definition of what 'legal' means.



          At the end of the day though, the real world isn't a game. Even if you could find some obscure and bizarre legal loophole to override precedent, the law isn't a set of magic rules. Its just rules that we made up. Nobody would have to accept it. A democratic government governs with the consent of the people. Attempting to use force to subvert the will of the people would be how a president becomes a dictator.






          share|improve this answer















          The short answer is no. The longer answer is that this framing isn't particularly helpful.



          There are a number of overlapping factors that prevent the president from legally suspending elections like some tinpot dictator. In particular Article II Section I of the Constitution and the 12th, 20th, 22nd, and 25th amendments which combine to define presidential elections and succession.



          Terms ending are not directly linked to elections being held. Even if elections could not be held for some catastrophic reason, the president should still leave office at the end of their term according to the line of succession (if no elections occurred at all many of their terms will have ended at the same time, but there should be a President Pro Tempore of the Senate because Senate terms are staggered). This is all theoretical since it's never been tested and hopefully never will be.



          Perhaps an even more boring reason why the president cannot simply suspend presidential elections is that the federal government does not run elections. The state governments do. A state government may have the ability to suspend or reschedule an election, and there are rules in place for if a state fails to make a selection on the prescribed day. If they still haven't named electors in time for the meeting of the Electoral College, that state will simply not cast any votes.



          The only legal way around any of this would be modifying the Constitution. Because of course you can make anything 'legal' if you change the definition of what 'legal' means.



          At the end of the day though, the real world isn't a game. Even if you could find some obscure and bizarre legal loophole to override precedent, the law isn't a set of magic rules. Its just rules that we made up. Nobody would have to accept it. A democratic government governs with the consent of the people. Attempting to use force to subvert the will of the people would be how a president becomes a dictator.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 3 hours ago









          Brythan

          75.2k8 gold badges163 silver badges256 bronze badges




          75.2k8 gold badges163 silver badges256 bronze badges










          answered 5 hours ago









          TalTal

          6324 silver badges8 bronze badges




          6324 silver badges8 bronze badges







          • 1





            +lots for "the law isn't a set of magic rules". This simple fact is often overlooked.

            – James K
            4 hours ago











          • "the law isn't a set of magic rules" - also why the peaceful transition of power is not guaranteed, though it's happened many times over. If a President didn't want to leave and they had the support of the military, it would be tough to do much about it.

            – David Rice
            3 hours ago












          • 1





            +lots for "the law isn't a set of magic rules". This simple fact is often overlooked.

            – James K
            4 hours ago











          • "the law isn't a set of magic rules" - also why the peaceful transition of power is not guaranteed, though it's happened many times over. If a President didn't want to leave and they had the support of the military, it would be tough to do much about it.

            – David Rice
            3 hours ago







          1




          1





          +lots for "the law isn't a set of magic rules". This simple fact is often overlooked.

          – James K
          4 hours ago





          +lots for "the law isn't a set of magic rules". This simple fact is often overlooked.

          – James K
          4 hours ago













          "the law isn't a set of magic rules" - also why the peaceful transition of power is not guaranteed, though it's happened many times over. If a President didn't want to leave and they had the support of the military, it would be tough to do much about it.

          – David Rice
          3 hours ago





          "the law isn't a set of magic rules" - also why the peaceful transition of power is not guaranteed, though it's happened many times over. If a President didn't want to leave and they had the support of the military, it would be tough to do much about it.

          – David Rice
          3 hours ago













          4














          The Constitution sets a presidential term at 4 years, and the 22nd amendment pretty firmly sets a two-term maximum:




          No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once...




          Since this was a Constitutional amendment, there is no legal way to extend a presidential term after 8 years (or technically 10 if you were a VP-turned-Pres mid-term) without passing a new amendment to allow it. This applies even if elections themselves are suspended for an emergency - the president's term is up when it's up, regardless of whether there's anyone else to take up the office.



          Whether or not there's a illegal but effective way to stay president after two terms would be pure speculation.






          share|improve this answer

























          • There is a legal way: convince the congress and at least 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution.

            – phoog
            6 hours ago











          • @phoog Fair point. I added that qualifier.

            – Bobson
            6 hours ago















          4














          The Constitution sets a presidential term at 4 years, and the 22nd amendment pretty firmly sets a two-term maximum:




          No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once...




          Since this was a Constitutional amendment, there is no legal way to extend a presidential term after 8 years (or technically 10 if you were a VP-turned-Pres mid-term) without passing a new amendment to allow it. This applies even if elections themselves are suspended for an emergency - the president's term is up when it's up, regardless of whether there's anyone else to take up the office.



          Whether or not there's a illegal but effective way to stay president after two terms would be pure speculation.






          share|improve this answer

























          • There is a legal way: convince the congress and at least 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution.

            – phoog
            6 hours ago











          • @phoog Fair point. I added that qualifier.

            – Bobson
            6 hours ago













          4












          4








          4







          The Constitution sets a presidential term at 4 years, and the 22nd amendment pretty firmly sets a two-term maximum:




          No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once...




          Since this was a Constitutional amendment, there is no legal way to extend a presidential term after 8 years (or technically 10 if you were a VP-turned-Pres mid-term) without passing a new amendment to allow it. This applies even if elections themselves are suspended for an emergency - the president's term is up when it's up, regardless of whether there's anyone else to take up the office.



          Whether or not there's a illegal but effective way to stay president after two terms would be pure speculation.






          share|improve this answer















          The Constitution sets a presidential term at 4 years, and the 22nd amendment pretty firmly sets a two-term maximum:




          No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once...




          Since this was a Constitutional amendment, there is no legal way to extend a presidential term after 8 years (or technically 10 if you were a VP-turned-Pres mid-term) without passing a new amendment to allow it. This applies even if elections themselves are suspended for an emergency - the president's term is up when it's up, regardless of whether there's anyone else to take up the office.



          Whether or not there's a illegal but effective way to stay president after two terms would be pure speculation.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 3 hours ago









          Brythan

          75.2k8 gold badges163 silver badges256 bronze badges




          75.2k8 gold badges163 silver badges256 bronze badges










          answered 6 hours ago









          BobsonBobson

          15k1 gold badge34 silver badges79 bronze badges




          15k1 gold badge34 silver badges79 bronze badges












          • There is a legal way: convince the congress and at least 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution.

            – phoog
            6 hours ago











          • @phoog Fair point. I added that qualifier.

            – Bobson
            6 hours ago

















          • There is a legal way: convince the congress and at least 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution.

            – phoog
            6 hours ago











          • @phoog Fair point. I added that qualifier.

            – Bobson
            6 hours ago
















          There is a legal way: convince the congress and at least 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution.

          – phoog
          6 hours ago





          There is a legal way: convince the congress and at least 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution.

          – phoog
          6 hours ago













          @phoog Fair point. I added that qualifier.

          – Bobson
          6 hours ago





          @phoog Fair point. I added that qualifier.

          – Bobson
          6 hours ago










          Takiro is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          Takiro is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          Takiro is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











          Takiro is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














          Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f42427%2fis-there-a-way-for-presidents-to-legally-extend-their-terms-beyond-the-maximum-o%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

          Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

          Tom Holland Mục lục Đầu đời và giáo dục | Sự nghiệp | Cuộc sống cá nhân | Phim tham gia | Giải thưởng và đề cử | Chú thích | Liên kết ngoài | Trình đơn chuyển hướngProfile“Person Details for Thomas Stanley Holland, "England and Wales Birth Registration Index, 1837-2008" — FamilySearch.org”"Meet Tom Holland... the 16-year-old star of The Impossible""Schoolboy actor Tom Holland finds himself in Oscar contention for role in tsunami drama"“Naomi Watts on the Prince William and Harry's reaction to her film about the late Princess Diana”lưu trữ"Holland and Pflueger Are West End's Two New 'Billy Elliots'""I'm so envious of my son, the movie star! British writer Dominic Holland's spent 20 years trying to crack Hollywood - but he's been beaten to it by a very unlikely rival"“Richard and Margaret Povey of Jersey, Channel Islands, UK: Information about Thomas Stanley Holland”"Tom Holland to play Billy Elliot""New Billy Elliot leaving the garage"Billy Elliot the Musical - Tom Holland - Billy"A Tale of four Billys: Tom Holland""The Feel Good Factor""Thames Christian College schoolboys join Myleene Klass for The Feelgood Factor""Government launches £600,000 arts bursaries pilot""BILLY's Chapman, Holland, Gardner & Jackson-Keen Visit Prime Minister""Elton John 'blown away' by Billy Elliot fifth birthday" (video with John's interview and fragments of Holland's performance)"First News interviews Arrietty's Tom Holland"“33rd Critics' Circle Film Awards winners”“National Board of Review Current Awards”Bản gốc"Ron Howard Whaling Tale 'In The Heart Of The Sea' Casts Tom Holland"“'Spider-Man' Finds Tom Holland to Star as New Web-Slinger”lưu trữ“Captain America: Civil War (2016)”“Film Review: ‘Captain America: Civil War’”lưu trữ“‘Captain America: Civil War’ review: Choose your own avenger”lưu trữ“The Lost City of Z reviews”“Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios Find Their 'Spider-Man' Star and Director”“‘Mary Magdalene’, ‘Current War’ & ‘Wind River’ Get 2017 Release Dates From Weinstein”“Lionsgate Unleashing Daisy Ridley & Tom Holland Starrer ‘Chaos Walking’ In Cannes”“PTA's 'Master' Leads Chicago Film Critics Nominations, UPDATED: Houston and Indiana Critics Nominations”“Nominaciones Goya 2013 Telecinco Cinema – ENG”“Jameson Empire Film Awards: Martin Freeman wins best actor for performance in The Hobbit”“34th Annual Young Artist Awards”Bản gốc“Teen Choice Awards 2016—Captain America: Civil War Leads Second Wave of Nominations”“BAFTA Film Award Nominations: ‘La La Land’ Leads Race”“Saturn Awards Nominations 2017: 'Rogue One,' 'Walking Dead' Lead”Tom HollandTom HollandTom HollandTom Hollandmedia.gettyimages.comWorldCat Identities300279794no20130442900000 0004 0355 42791085670554170004732cb16706349t(data)XX5557367