Ari Shapiro made this point in discussing Olympus Has Fallen on the Pop Culture Happy Hour podcast. He said it was absurd to portray that the president could give people orders in that situation and have them be followed. What he is saying is very logical. But is it actually the law?
Under Article IV of the 25th Amendment, wouldn’t a majority of the Cabinet and the vice president technically have to send a written declaration to Congress before the VP could take charge?
I don’t think the 25th Amendment says it’s the only way, so could the vague part of Article III, Section 6 still be in effect?
I don’t mean to be a pedant, but there is no Article III, section 6. Could you mean Article II, Section 1, paragraph 6?
For ease of discussion:
The 25th amendment starts “In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.”
II/1/6 starts “In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office.”
So, yeah, it seems like the 25th only covers a subset of the reasons the president is no longer the president. Obviously it’s untested whether a gun to the president’s head satisfies “Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office.”
What if it’s the VP holding the gun to the president’s head? (I’ve always thought Biden looked kinda shifty.)
And who determines inability? I doubt it’s simply the VP’s call to make.
I realize it’s not exactly Lexis/Nexus, but there have been a few well-researched novels that posit a kidnapping of the President, as well as the West Wing arc with Zoey’s kidnapping. The argument seems to run that if the President is that if he is under undue coercion, he is unable to discharge etc. and thus should be replaced, even if temporarily.
I’m not sure what the limits of the OP’s question are. So Leo pulls out a pistol and holds it to Jed Bartlet’s head, rendering him unable to discharge, and Hoynes whips a veto signature on the bill? Or terrorists take the Oval Office hostage for two hours? Or a day? or days? I think there must be some dividing line between a timeframe that can be waited out and one that can’t, and specifying it is crucial to a meaningful answer.
You are correct. It’s not automatic upon the gun being pointed to the President’s head but it is automatic but if the VP and a majority of the Cabinet say the President is incapacitated and send it in writing to Congress. That being said I assume in the situation people would obey or not obey considering the potential consequences after the situation is resolved.
[QUOTE=25th Amendment, Section 4]
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
[/QUOTE]
Lunge at the gunman, problem solved.
I know the question is probably just an academic exercise, but is there any real possibility the event could ever actually occur?
Well, there was this guy named Lincoln…
Maybe the Prez is holding the gun, and just scratching his head with the barrel?
Two to one LBJ already did that…
If this happened, I think the Secret Service would take the risk of killing the gunman. That is, however, a total guess since I have no training in criminal justice, etc.
Or Andrew Jackson!
Generally, not immediately doing something the president tells you to do is not illegal. And I’m sure if people knew the president was being forced to issue instructions they’d find plenty of ways to drag their feed while the situation resolved itself.
That said, while the senate probably wouldn’t rush to approve a new Agriculture Secretary if they knew the nominees mom was holding the presidential offspring hostage, the Vice President wouldn’t gain the authority to nominate his own sister instead until the 25th Amendment was properly invoked.
Shoot the hostage!
I forgot about that “Inability to discharge” bit. I tend to think it could be said that he or she is widely understood to indeed be suffering from such an inability as long as they are under duress.
The West Wing situation when his daughter was kidnapped was a fascinating scenario, but it was a little different in that (IIRC) President Bartlet voluntarily declared himself temporarily incapacitated (over Leo’s objections), and wrote a letter and all that jazz.
Am I the only one here who saw Air Force One?
If I remember correctly (it has been a while), they had this exact discussion, and the shifty cabinet member (Sec of Defense?) was trying to get the rest of the cabinet to sign the doc that the AG had prepared saying that President Solo was unable to discharge his duties. Vice President Close heroically held out, and I believe symbolically ripped it up near the end?
If anyone has seen this movie more recently than 10 years ago, feel free to correct any of my provided citations.
huh?
When the president is incapacitated, the highest ranking person who is aware of the situation assumes presidential authority. Remember Alexander Haig’s “I’m in charge here”, when Reagan was shot? Haig, as Secretary of State, was the highest ranking person who knew that the president was incapacitated, and as others became aware of the event, they would assume the authority on a minute-to-minute basis.
Vice president Bush was on board a flight to Texas, and could not be informed that he was acting president, so Haig was the highest in line at the moment. Anythingpresidential that Haig had done could not be challenged until someone above Haig was aware of the president’s situation, by which fact alone Haig’s authority would be automatically superseded.
If anyone makes the call, on his own behalf, of course he can be challenged, with a momentary dispute hinging on whether the president was in fact incapacitated, and parties obeying the executive command would have to make that judgment on the spot. And be held to deal with the consequences of their actions later on.