This was inspired by a plot point in the new Kiefer Sutherland show (which BTW I find equal parts intriguing/cheesy/maddening). A survivor is found 36 hours after the Capitol is bombed during the State of the Union and the “designated survivor”, the Secretary of HUD, is sworn in as president. In this case it turns out to be a congressman, but what if it had been someone else from the Cabinet? Would they rescind Kiefer’s presidency? I suppose his previous actions are still valid as “acting president” at least?
What if a "Designated Survivor" became president and then a higher ranking Cabinet member was found?
I don’t think he’d be displaced:
It looks like a cabinet member who is acting as president can be displaced, but only by the speaker or president pro tempore who was in office at the time the vacancy occurred. Another cabinet member would be someone else on the list in paragraph (1), and it says the acting president’s service shall not be terminated if someone higher on that list becomes available. (And I think “a congressman” would not be prior-entitled unless s/he had been elected speaker before the vacancy occurred.)
Ahhh…interesting! It kind of makes sense, although if the HUD Secretary had just become president five minutes earlier and then they found the Secretary of State or Attorney General in good condition, I think everyone would be annoyed.
It might be more annoying if they found the president pro tempore, which is now nothing more than an honorary title given to the most decrepit senator from the majority party.
Good point! I remember it was Strom Thurmond for a while. (Although the last two, Leahy and Hatch, are a lot sharper.) Given that, I wonder why Congress didn’t move it further down the list.
I recall that once in the past Hillary Clinton would have become president although she was not the designated survivor but for some other reason was not in attendance.
I think I was wrong about this part. This report from the Congressional Research Service says:
I guess “prior-entitled” just means “higher on the list,” not “entitled prior to the bad thing happening.” It’s a good thing none of this is important, and that if it ever becomes necessary to use it there will be time to convene a few committees and produce a few reports on the law’s flaws and lacunae. Like whether the speaker or PPT are “officers”, as only “officers” can act as president:
As a constituent of Leahy, I’d question that assessment.