Law enforcement officials identified the suspect as Cole Tomas Allen, 31, of Torrance, California, and said he was armed with multiple weapons before being stopped by Secret Service personnel near the event’s main security perimeter.

One law enforcement officer was struck in a bullet-resistant vest and is expected to recover, according to officials cited by The Associated Press.Addressing reporters later at the White House, Trump said the suspect had been carrying several weapons and described the officer’s survival as the result of close-range protective gear performance.

“He was shot from very close distance with a very powerful gun, and the vest did the job,” Trump said.The incident unfolded just as Trump was preparing to deliver remarks at the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner, his first attendance at the annual event as president.

Guests inside the subterranean ballroom reported hearing between five and eight shots before Secret Service agents rushed toward the president.Witnesses said agents surrounded Trump onstage as guests ducked beneath tables and shouted warnings echoed through the hall.

During the evacuation, Trump briefly stumbled and was helped to his feet by security personnel before being escorted out.The banquet hall, filled with journalists, political leaders and public figures, was immediately placed under lockdown. National Guard personnel and law enforcement officers secured exits while helicopters circled overhead and surrounding streets were sealed off.

Among those evacuated were Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and House Speaker Mike Johnson.Johnson later said he and his wife were “praying for our country tonight,” while House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said “The violence and chaos in America must end.”

Republican Representative Mike Lawler of New York, who attended the dinner, said the uncertainty in the room escalated quickly after the first loud noise.“We didn’t know what the hell it was,” Lawler said, adding that threats against public officials have become increasingly common.

The event briefly appeared likely to resume as staff reset tables, refilled water glasses and prepared Trump’s teleprompter. However, White House Correspondents’ Association President Weijia Jiang later announced the dinner would be canceled and rescheduled.“We will do this again,” Jiang told attendees.

The annual dinner, traditionally attended by presidents, journalists, lawmakers and celebrities, has long served as one of Washington’s most visible intersections of politics and media. Trump had not attended during his first term or the first year of his second term, making Saturday’s appearance particularly notable given his administration’s strained relationship with the press.

In recent months, Trump’s administration has clashed repeatedly with major media organizations including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Associated Press, while facing criticism over restrictions on press access and legal disputes involving journalists.

Ahead of the dinner, nearly 500 retired journalists signed a petition urging the correspondents’ association to take a stronger stand against what they described as threats to press freedom.Outside the hotel, a small group of protesters gathered before the event, some carrying signs criticizing the administration’s treatment of the media.

Authorities have not yet released further details about the suspect’s motive or how he reached the security perimeter of one of Washington’s most heavily protected political events.

Recent remarks by U.S. President Donald Trump regarding Iran have prompted renewed discussion among some Democratic lawmakers about the potential use of the 25th Amendment to remove a sitting president from office.

The debate, however, reflects more of a political signal than a viable constitutional pathway, given the significant institutional and partisan barriers involved.The 25th Amendment, ratified in 1967 following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, was designed to clarify presidential succession and ensure continuity of executive authority.

It addressed longstanding gaps in the Constitution, particularly the absence of a clear mechanism for filling a vacancy in the vice presidency. Historical data from the Congressional Research Service indicates that between 1789 and 1967, the vice presidency remained vacant for a cumulative total exceeding 37 years due to deaths, resignations, or succession.

The amendment comprises multiple sections, but current political discussion has centered on Section 4, which outlines a process for involuntarily transferring presidential powers if the president is deemed unable to discharge the duties of the office. Under this provision, the vice president, together with a majority of the cabinet or another congressionally designated body, can declare the president unfit.

If the president contests the determination, Congress must convene within 48 hours, and a two-thirds majority in both chambers is required to uphold the decision.While Section 3 of the amendment has been used in limited circumstances, primarily involving temporary medical incapacitation, Section 4 has never been invoked.

In 2021, then-President Joe Biden temporarily transferred authority during a medical procedure, illustrating the amendment’s routine procedural application rather than its more controversial provisions.

Calls to consider Section 4 have surfaced previously, most notably after the January 6 United States Capitol attack, when some Democratic leaders urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to initiate the process. Among those advocating such action were Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Those efforts did not advance, reflecting both political constraints and the high constitutional threshold required.The current discussion emerges in a similarly constrained environment. Republicans maintain narrow majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, making bipartisan cooperation essential for any attempt to proceed.

Analysts note that without substantial defections from within the president’s party, the two-thirds congressional requirement effectively renders the mechanism unattainable under present conditions.

Scott Anderson, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, characterized the prospect as politically unworkable, citing the improbability of sufficient Republican support.

Public opinion data further underscores this dynamic, with approximately 82 percent of Republican voters expressing approval of Trump’s presidency, reinforcing party cohesion at a critical juncture.The political risks for Democrats are also significant.

Previous efforts to remove Trump through impeachment during his first term failed to secure conviction in the Senate, despite passage in the House. Those experiences continue to inform strategic calculations within the party, particularly as lawmakers prepare for upcoming midterm elections in which control of Congress remains contested.

Some Democratic legislators have indicated a preference to prioritize policy initiatives over procedural challenges to the presidency. Representative Madeleine Dean of Pennsylvania stated that pursuing impeachment or similar measures at this stage may not represent the most effective use of legislative time, emphasizing instead issues such as economic policy, inflation, and childcare access.

Republican leaders have responded critically to the renewed focus on the amendment. House Speaker Mike Johnson described the discussion as politically motivated, arguing that it reflects a lack of substantive policy direction among Democratic lawmakers.

The exchange highlights the broader partisan divide that shapes both the feasibility and the framing of constitutional mechanisms in contemporary U.S. politics.

The renewed attention to the 25th Amendment illustrates its enduring relevance as a constitutional safeguard, while also underscoring the practical limitations of its most consequential provisions.

Although designed to address extraordinary circumstances, its application remains contingent on political consensus at the highest levels of government, a condition that appears absent in the current landscape.

The proposed “Commission on Presidential Capacity to Discharge the Powers and Duties of the Office” would create a 17-member body empowered to assess whether a president is fit to remain in office under criteria including physical or mental incapacity, or impairment due to substance use.

The initiative revives legislation first introduced by Raskin in 2020 during Trump’s first term.The move comes as some Democrats in Congress have renewed discussions about possible impeachment proceedings or invoking the 25th Amendment to the United States Constitution, which provides a mechanism to transfer presidential powers if a leader is deemed unable to perform official duties.

Raskin’s proposal is unlikely to advance in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where Speaker Mike Johnson has been a strong supporter of Trump. Republican lawmakers in both chambers have also blocked separate Democratic efforts to pass a resolution aimed at ending recent U.S. military actions in Iran that were not formally authorized by Congress.

Political tensions have escalated following Trump’s recent warning that “a whole civilization will die” unless Iran permits free passage through the Strait of Hormuz, a key global shipping route. The statement came after U.S. forces, alongside Israel, launched military operations against Iran beginning February 28, raising concerns among lawmakers about the scope and objectives of the intervention.

Trump, who is serving his second term, was impeached twice during his first presidency but was acquitted on both occasions by the Senate.

While many Democrats had previously avoided renewed impeachment efforts, recent developments have prompted some within the party to revisit options for challenging Trump’s continuation in office, though views remain divided within the caucus.