FACT CHECK: No reports of SC order ousting Marcos

There is no ruling or order from the Supreme Court ordering the removal of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., who, as a sitting president, is immune from suit

AT A GLANCE

• The claim that the Supreme Court has ousted President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is false.
• The SC does not have the authority to remove a sitting president, who is protected by constitutional immunity.
• Currently, there are no impeachment proceedings against Marcos, and the video making the claim lacks credible evidence.

This is AI-generated. Read the article for full context. Report any errors.

Claim: The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled on a case against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., removing him from office.

Rating: FALSE

Why we fact-checked this: A YouTube video uploaded by the channel “PINAS BALITA TV” on October 26, 2026, made this claim. The video is titled: “NAKARMA NA! KAPAPASOK LANG! BEBE EM TALUNAN sa mga KAS0NG NA1SAMPA sa KANYA sa K0RTE SUPR3MA?” (Karma at last! Just in! BBM loses in cases filed against him at the Supreme Court?). 

Its thumbnail and accompanying captions include: “Pinatalsik! Lumayas ka sa Palasyo!” (Ousted! Get out of the Palace!), further claiming that the SC has finally acted. 

As of writing, the video has garnered 21,589 views.

The facts: No official announcements, press releases, or SC decisions confirm the removal of Marcos from Malacañang.

The SC has no constitutional authority to oust a sitting president, who enjoys absolute immunity from suit while in office.

Article XI, Section 2 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution says the president may only be removed from office “on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.”

No impeachment case: At present, no impeachment complaint can proceed against Marcos because he is also immune from new impeachment proceedings until February 2027, after the House of Representatives junked two impeachment complaints filed against him in February 2026 for lack of substance.

Under Article XI, Section 3 of the Constitution, no impeachment proceeding can be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year.

As of writing, only Vice President Sara Duterte is undergoing an impeachment trial in the Senate impeachment court.

Lack of evidence: The video provides no verifiable court documents, authentic footage, or official statements confirming the claim about Marcos made in its title and thumbnail.

Instead, the clip features commentary from an unidentified male reacting to a third-party media report regarding the constitutionality of budget allocations.

Specifically, he discussed the recent SC decision declaring the 2024 and 2025 General Appropriations Act unconstitutional. While the High Court’s declaration regarding the budget laws is true, it is unrelated to the claims against the President.

Debunked: Rappler had published a fact-check debunking a claim about alleged criminal charges by the SC against Marcos. – Lyndee Buenagua/Rappler.com

Lyndee Buenagua is a Metro Manila-based journalist who primarily covers Bicol and Baguio. She is also an alumna of Aries Rufo Journalism Fellowship of Rappler for 2024.

Keep us aware of suspicious Facebook pages, groups, accounts, websites, articles, or photos in your network by contacting us at factcheck@rappler.com. Let us battle disinformation one Fact Check at a time.