No, we’ve been over this - I think Trump is out until Congress adjudicates, and there’s a delay on that - so he’d be gone.
I have no idea whether that reason bears any relation to Pence’s actual motivations, and IANAL and can’t assess its jurisprudential validity, but I actually think that sounds like a defensible argument. If you really believe that the 25th amendment should be reserved for things like the POTUS falling into a coma or suffering disabling dementia, then this is not an appropriate use of it.
(IANAD either and can’t tell to what extent Trump’s atrocious acts are due to mental illness, although I’ve known plenty of people with mental illness issues who didn’t go around exhorting terrorist mobs to commit insurrection. But it doesn’t seem to me that Trump’s mental capacities now are noticeably different from what they were four years ago. He’s incapable and unfit to govern, yes, but only in the same way he’s always been.)
Impeachment and removal from office, not formal deactivation under pretense of an incapacitating illness, are the prescribed remedy for a President committing high crimes and misdemeanors. I’m not saying that that’s what Pence actually thinks should happen, much less wants to be publicly associated with making happen, but in principle I could see a case being made for his stated objection to invoking the 25th.
I’m almost 100% sure this is not true.
The Constitution evidently isn’t crystal clear on what happens if the VP is gone, and the President & Congress don’t agree on a replacement. But absent a VP, it does appear the Speaker would inherit the powers under the 25th wrt a disabled President.
From the end of that article, regarding the 25th in particular:
John D. Feerick, who played an important role in drafting the 25th Amendment, discussed these scenarios in depth in a 2011 Fordham Law Review article.
“In situations where the Vice Presidency is vacant (or the Vice President is disabled) and the President is disabled but has not declared himself to be under Section 3, what happens is not entirely clear,” Feerick said. He points to scholarly opinions that the person next in line under the Presidential Succession Act would need to make disability determinations in there is no Vice President.
“Therefore, the Speaker of the House would be the person to make the disability determination in the event no Vice President could do so. However, there is no current law in place to provide procedures and safeguards to ensure that the Speaker (or next in line) does not abuse this power (such as the Twenty-Fifth Amendment’s requirement that the Vice President has supporting opinion from a majority of the Cabinet). I believe a good case can be made that Congress has the power to create such a law,” Feerick argues.
No, what happens is that it is declared, and then the president disagrees, and the VP and cabinet have four days to respond. If they do, then it goes to Congress, who have 21 days.
As long as Pence and cabinet will testify at Trump’s trial against his use of the insanity defense.
Not for up to 25 days.
The 25th gives the Senate three weeks to act, so they could 25th him and then run out the clock on the rest of his term, and it seems possible that McConnel might play along and not order the Senate back into session before then. But using the 25th in a way that’s both unprecedented and pretty clearly against the original intent of the amendment, and carrying through on it by invoking parliamentary tricks about when the Senate convenes, is a bad remedy to the current situation.
So here’s what it says
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days 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. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session.
As I read it, the VP et al have 4 days to respond in writing - but that does not preclude them doing so immediately. In which case the President does not get his powers back until Congress rules.
The intent of the amendment was to remove the president if they were not capable of executing their office. It doesn’t specify why.
I also don’t think that it sets any sort of bad precedent, as it would require members of the president’s own party and hand picked staff to rule against him.
It’s not parliamentary tricks, the amendment specifically states that the cabinet has 4 days to send their argument to congress, then congress has 21 days to decide.
It’s not even up to McConnel, as it would require an answer from the house as well.
I suspect that Pence is holding this as an action to ensure Trump’s “good” behavior until the inauguration. Trump steps out of line, and he invokes it.
To me, it’s the result that matters more. The 25th goes into effect immediately, so Trump can’t do anything to cause any more harm.
And, frankly, I would say willingly inciting a seditious riot, thinking that allowing a coup to happen would not cause him harm, combined with the other ways Trump has shown such utterly pathologically poor judgement , is an indication he can no longer execute the duties of the office. It fits, even if it isn’t the best remedy, and that’s all you need to get things started.
Heck, if Trump had to actually do it himself, I’m not sure he would be capable of following the procedure to declare himself fit. He seems that unable to handle the job.
No. The office of Vice President becomes vacant, and during the vacancy the Speaker of the House stays Speaker. There is no line of succession for the office of VP, only replacement. In the time between when the Succession Act was passed and when the 25th was ratified, when LBJ ascended to the presidency the VP position simply became vacant until January of '65, the Senate President Pro Tempore assuming the formal presidency thereof, and the Speaker becoming “first” in line.
I find it ambiguous as to whether the president would resume their powers before those 4 days are up or not. In either case, they would not need to wait those 4 days if it seems as though he would.
Agreed, but see my subsequent comment above - critically, it appears that with no VP, the Speaker inherits the powers under the 25th with respect to the President.
Wouldn’t that require a spine? And balls? And honor?
I’ve been spending some time at the Newsmax site, in the comments, to understand what they’re thinking. I don’t think that pardons from Trump would be that valued because those folks still are saying that the violence was perpetrated by Antifa.
Band name!
Maybe I’m stating what everyone else already knows (it just occurred to me), but the several ways of handling a lawless president (resignation, 25th amendment, impeachment) have all failed to ensure prevention of future and potential bad acts by said president. What has restrained him the most, to the degree which he can be restrained, have been actions by social media. Cutting off his communication firehose of course wouldn’t stop him from further harm, but it seems to me that it’s been the strongest factor to date in keeping him in check. How tenuous.
I gotta believe that every person in Trump’s orbit is telling him not to pardon the rioters. A pardon could be used against him in a trial to bolster the charge that Trump incited the rioters. In addition, a large majority of American’s are against the rioters and a pardon would really hurt the Republicans. Even nut-case Rep. Greene won’t say anything positive about them.
Looks like that is a possibility, but is untested in practice. There would probably be (loud) arguments from both sides.
Correct, except they have 21 days to rule. My point in bringing up the 21 days was to show it would last longer than Trump had left.
I wasn’t meaning to imply they had to take four days to respond. But note this is their second response–the first response is what starts the whole thing.