But surely the law can be changed by simple majority in House and Senate.
Not at the “whim of the administration”. As statutory provisions, they can only be amended by Congress.
Don’t know if they could put that into the budget reconciliation measure, on the basis that removing all those perks from ex-president Trump saves money…
What is your reasoning for why a simple majority would be enough?
Plus you get into bills of attainder and/or ex post facto territory if you make a special law for the guy you are currently holding a trial for. And they’re already going to likely have to litigate the ability to impeach him after he’s out of office.
(All based on what I’ve heard: IANAL).
The Former Presidents Act is not part of the Constitution. It only required a simple majority to pass, so it only requires a simple majority to change, surely?
These are legitimate concerns, sure. Obviously the exact content of any change to the law could be challenged as unconstitutional.
Not unless they abolish the filibuster, or this bill can be shown to fit into a category that would not be subject to a filibuster.
(In theory maybe no one would attempt a filibuster, letting it pass with just 50 votes, but then why wouldn’t they vote for the bill?)
I don’t want him or Javanka having access to classified info after this. Tr*ump might be too scatterbrained to listen to it but Javanka won’t be.
Yeah, that would be brought up, if you establish a law specifically to deprive Donald J. Trump alone of those benefits retroactively. If the Law at the time that DJT exists the White House is that he gets certain benefits, the presumption is that those benefits stay at least as they were on that day.
This particular problem ends (for now) on the 20th unless he is removed in some way earlier. For future purposes you’d have to rely on the impeachment to proceed and bar him from holding office again.
For the other family members, I don’t think you have a legal tool to bar them from ever achieving high office, or applying for a clearance on their own merit if a job requires it and they otherwise qualify.
It would take an amendment to the Constitution, sure. Which would be fanciful in this day and age.
But wind back the clock to Magna Carta, and take a look at clause 50 for a chuckle:
We will remove entirely the kinsmen of Gerard d’Athée from their bailiwicks, so that in future they may hold no bailiwick in England, [namely] Engelard de Cigogné, Peter, Guy and Andrew de Chanceaux, Guy de Cigogné, Geoffrey de Martigny and his brothers, Philip Marc, his brothers, and Geoffrey his nephew, and the whole of their brood.
They must have really not liked that Gerard d’Athée character.
I thought they (Tr*mp and Javanka) would keep their top secret clearances, which they should never have qualified for to begin with, unless purposely revoked. Regardless of whether or not any of them run for federal office again.
Didn’t ex-presidents lose the Secret Service protection-for-life benefit a few years ago? (8? 10? 15?) The way I remember it congress decided to do away with ex-POTUS protection-for-life but grandfathered all the living ex-presidents in. Plus they would still have gotten a few years protection after they left office.
I think W. Bush or Obama would have been the first prez not to receive it except congress changed its mind or something and brought it back.
Found this on wiki:
The original act provided for lifetime Secret Service protection for former presidents. In 1994, protection was reduced to ten years for presidents first taking office after 1996. This protection limitation was reversed in early 2013 by Pub.L. 112–257 (text) (pdf) also known as the Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012 .[3]
All living former presidents and their spouses after Dwight D. Eisenhower are now entitled to receive lifetime Secret Service protection. Their children are entitled to protection “until they become 16 years of age”.[4]
My understanding is that it was removed and then reinstated after 9-11.
That was about what I thought it was but my link above (Former Presidents Act) says:
In 1994, protection was reduced to ten years for presidents first taking office after 1996
Bearing in mind the individual person DJT does not have a security clearance, it’s that a POTUS has access to classified information by virtue of his office – once he is out of office it is at the discretion of the new administration what briefings to provide the ex-prez and what to include as a matter of courtesy.
I was just ready to type the question that you’ve answered. If it’s a courtesy, Joe would be insane to let Donald in on anything. The man will be no more fit to receive it, understand it and keep it a secret as an ex-president than he was when he was entitled to them.
Two lines below that:
On January 10, 2013, President Barack Obama signed the Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012, reinstating lifetime Secret Service protection for his predecessor George W. Bush, himself, and all subsequent presidents.
Also, going back to the earlier question, even people with a regular “earned” security clearance, it does not mean they are entitled to whatever information classified at their level on a mere “ask and it shall be given” basis after leaving their official post.
In the case of DJT, already as President it was widely noted he cared not for the content and at most only looked at the cover page highlight bullets anyway so it would be entirely within reason to give him only that and only about things that are going to be found out soon anyway or are not imminently critical.
Hmm…
"Good morning, Big Guy:
- Last night we started bombing Karjackistan.
- Today a report comes out that it’s the hottest year ever AGAIN and we are literally toast within 50 years.
- No, we checked, yesterday’s news was not fake, your property in Palanganuinui IS gettign repo’ed.
- Kim and Vlad again tweeted word for word something that we planted in your last briefing on purpose. Stop that.
- Sources say Graham is finally officially coming out this afternoon. Franklin, that is."
Simply ignore the ban - he could win primaries with a write in. The confrontation would be classic Trump.
Since the most outrageous and endearing act available to him is pardoning the beloved patriots who shit on the capitol, I believe it likely that he will pardon them.
He should warn Trump that any release of the information will result in an immediate end to the sharing. Then, feed him nothing but believable, innocuous, but completely fictional information that only Trump will receive. Basically the equivalent of a spam trap/honeytoken/trap street/etc.
Even if you are entitled to security briefings I don’t think you can take anything home in writing. I’d hate to be the Russian handler who has to debrief Trump to find out anything mentioned that doesn’t have the word “Trump” in it.
Do not underestimate Trump’s thirst for retribution, trolling, and spite. He’s demonstrated a willingness to burn down the Republican party, and absolute petty spite toward Biden. He’ll absolutely sow as much chaos as his legal counsel will advise him is safe, and then some.
He’s still got a whole day to go…