A President can’t run again after two terms. But could an ex President be given a cabinet position, for example Secretary of State?
Sure. But he wouldn’t be in the line of succession.
Sure, why not? But he or she wouldn’t be in the line of succession if they had already served their two terms. We’ve had other members of the cabinet there couldn’t serve as president due to being naturalized citizens (Madeline Albright).
Taft served on the Supreme Court after his term as President was up, I don’t see why the cabinet post would be a problem.
In addition, I think one or two members of Bush’s cabinet aren’t citizens by birth. If some massive decapitation strike wiped out our elected leaders, they’d just skip any cabinet members who couldn’t serve as president.
Alright, thanks all.
They would probably be of better use as Expresident.
Jimmy Carter sometimes travels to different countrys to consult with leaders.
Richard Nixon traveled to the Soviet Union several times.
Bush 1 and Clinton traveled to sunami torn regions and caused a lot of world wide attention.
There’s certainly no legal impediment to it, although he (since so far they’ve all been dudes) would be out of the line of succession if he’d served two full terms, as noted above. For awhile I thought Jimmy Carter might make someone a good SecState, but by now he’s too old.
In addition to W.H. Taft’s post-presidential gig as Chief Justice of the United States, John Quincy Adams was elected to Congress and gave invaluable service for another 18 years as an antislavery voice. John Tyler was elected to the Confederate Congress but died before he could take his seat (just as well). Andrew Johnson was elected to the U.S. Senate after leaving the White House, but also died before beginning his term there. Herbert Hoover headed a Truman-appointed commission to review the structure of the Executive Branch. And both George Washington and Dwight D. Eisenhower had their Army rank restored to them by their successors, although neither exercised command thereafter.
A previous thread that may be of interest: Bill Clinton, Secretary of State? - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board
As a follow-on to what Elendil’s Heir said about Washington and Eisenhower having their Army ranks restored, Washington was later promoted (post-humously) to General of the Armies of the United States. (According to Wikipedia, the promotion was finalized on 13 Aug 1978, retroactive to 4 July 1776. No word on whether Washington was entitled to back pay.)
Good point. Washington served without pay during the Revolutionary War and the Quasi-War with France, though, so I think the Federal deficit won’t be further bloated by his heirs’ request for back pay. 
Isn’t it debatable whether there really IS a two-term restriction on serving as president? Twelth amendment prevents somebody from becoming Vice President if they are not eligible to be president. Twenty second amendment prevents somebody from being elected more than two times. Not being able to be elected president does not necessarily mean you are constitutionally not eligible to serve as the president if you are in the line of succession. So not only is it questionable whether succession really skips you, it’s also questionable if Ex-Presidents who served two terms are really barred from being Vice Presidents.
Let’s consider an opposite situation, let’s say the Vice President becomes President through some sort of an incident involving a grassy knoll or a production of “Our American Cousin”. Serves a year or so, and then gets elected for a full term. Can he not run for re-election? You can only get elected twice, but that doesn’t mean you can’t serve more than two terms or more than 8 years, right?
“but that doesn’t mean you can’t serve more than two terms or more than 8 years, right?” Wrong. The 22nd amendment clearly covers your specific “opposite situation”.
“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.”
As to the more general situation you posit referring to the 12th amendment, I know we’ve debated it here before, so I’m not going to rehash it.
To address some of your comments, read the whole amendment:
“Amendment XXII
Section 1. 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…”
So the maximum a person could serve as President is for 10 years.
Here’s how: a Vice-President is elevated to the presidency for two years, then he is re-elected twice.
Just to check, can the president occupy any post besides the presidency? Or is it the VP slot too? I realize that wherever he is he isn’t in the line.
A lot of people have invented bizarre conspiracy theories about how Bill Clinton or George Bush were going to invoke some constitutional loophole to get elected for a third term. The bottom line is - barring a repeal of the 22nd Amendment - nobody is going to get an extra term. The intent of the Constitution is clear and if anyone was foolish enough to seriously try to get around it, the Supreme Court would rule against them in a heartbeat.
Just one quick add to what’s been said, with reference to groman’s post. Yeah, it’s hypothetically possible to devise a scenario in which a man who’s served two terms already becomes President by appointment to an office in line for the job and then the precise improbable series of events elevates him to the job.
But Bill Clinton and GWB cannot run for Vice President. Read the last sentence of the 12th Amendment:
If you are prohibited from being elected President, you’re also prohibited from being elected Vice-President. (What’s the point? Are you head and shoulders above everyone else at presiding over the Senate?)
Right, which is exactly what I meant. What is the problem with the opposite. A person is elected as president, re-elected, then becomes say Secretary of State and becomes president through succession. What part prevents that?
It’s not clear cut that “No person shall be elected…” makes one “Consitutionally ineligible to the office”. The constitution uses the word “eligible” in places concerning natural born citizens and age in context of presidency, but 22nd amendment says “elected”, to me this sounds like a person who has served two terms is still eligible for office, just not allowed to be elected, hence could be the Vice President.
The same person cannot hold two “offices of trust” simultaneously; a dispensation is usually provided for unpaid membership in blue-ribbon committee-type gigs for everyone other than the Prez (VPs are frequently named to head boards, committees or task forces just to give them something to actually DO), but (more traditionally than legally) the President never appoints himself to anything else.
But that would mean that potentially one person could serve for twelve years, if the Prez and VP both conk out early on, which, while not strictly spelled out in the 22[super]nd[/super] amendment, was the intent of the framers (to prevent it, that is).
This part of the Constitution is much more amenable to interpretation in the light of the writers’ intent, and I think it’s pretty clear that they didn’t want anyone to be President for more than 10 years at the most. The top job has a limited possession, and I think they would include the second-top in that category as well.
Personally, I think that if Bill were appointed and confirmed as SoS, he would be just fine with a bill negating his eligibility be in the line of succession, spelled out very explicitly that nobody, absolutely nobody gets to be the POTUS or VP for (in his case) more than two full terms.
Thing is, a former President is already useful as an unofficial ambassador-at-large. If Bush41, for example, takes a meeting with the Saudis and says “Y’know, some of these there policies of yours might be needin’ a little trim, there, jes’ t’be prudent,” no-one in the room doubts that if they jerk him around, he could tell the current president, who will take him seriously. Since the ex-Presidents don’t have official powers, but they do have influence, they can skip the official diplomatic crap and save a lot of time. Making a former Prez Sec of State would actually hurt his ability to exploit back channels and whatnot. Clinton has already described some of the additional freedoms he has of being a former president - he can concentrate on the issues he likes and not get bogged down with official duties.