Indeed the president may even sign on a contract with regard various things about the residence section. That contract may demote him to lodger status… not a Tennant, not even a squatter.
And since Trump is a really nice, sensitive guy who genuinely cares about the well-being of the American people, he’d open up the White House as a homeless shelter, or a refuge for abused women, or a clinic for a well-established charitable organization like Planned Parenthood.
It would make Orson Scott Card look like a prophet. (Instead of the douchecanoe he actually is.)
Didn’t we have exactly the same question about Bush eight years ago?
Cite?
Apologies, elfkin477, I should always search before posting. Some interesting responses here though.
No, but every president has been accused of planning to do it. That includes George Washington.
The closest any president came was Franklin Roosevelt, who was elected to four terms back when two terms was a tradition instead of a law.
And he never did leave the White House, did he?
(Well, not under his own power, anyway.)
Actually, he died in Warm Springs, Georgia
That’s an impressive feat, since the White House wasn’t even finished until 1800, three years after George Washington’s term ended. (Did they build the place around him?)
Are you asking for a cite that the President does not own or hold a lease to the White House?
The President occupies the White House as a matter of federal statute.
The President does not have a lease as that term is generally understood. A lease might be inferred if he paid rent, but he doesn’t. He is a guest.
The White House grounds and residence are property of the National Park Service. (Cite).
Federal law applies in national parks. (Cite).
The DC home rule charter does not grant the DC government any jurisdictional powers over federal installations, including national parks.
Nitpick/ By constitutional amendment rather than “a law” although “by law” would work.
No, a citation that that a resident on Federal property can be forcibly removed without due process of law. We’ve people here who seem to think that the afternoon of the 23rd the Secret Service is going to waltz into the White House residence, handcuff the First Family and haul all their personal possessions out onto Pennsylvania Ave and unceremoniously dump them there … if there’s a written Federal Law that allows this, then so be it … if not, then it won’t happen …
The closest I can come up with is 36 CFR 8.4:
My argument is that barring any specific Federal Law, the laws of the State are used in the case where housing is provided as a condition of employment … and 36 CFR defines “State” as including the District of Columbia … for example, the NPS fires one of their rangers and the ranger won’t move out … the NPS has to go to State court and file an eviction and use the procedure set out in State law …
The Constitution is a law. I’m calling the nitpick police.
It’s called “trespassing.” 36 CFR 2.31 prohibits trespassing in federal parks, if you’re interested. Trespassers may be removed without due process.
Also, this argument is total bollocks.
You cannot trespass in your own home … whether you own the building or not … it’s call “civil rights” …
Cite?
Are you being deliberately obtuse or just trolling now?
Moderator Note
It is against the rules to accuse another poster of trolling outside of the Pit. No warning issued, but don’t do this again.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Being inside a building - even sleeping inside it - does not mean it’s your house. You have to establish you have tenant rights. Obama doesn’t own the White House and he doesn’t have a lease. He would legally be classified as a transient guest.