Talk:Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has not yet been assigned a subject. The options are: "Person", "People", "Place", "Thing", or "Events".

Template:FAOL

Another Ambiguous Provision

I realize this is highly improbable, but what the hell.

Let's say the President has to go in for an emergency surgery, and the VP is elevated to acting president (either by a presidential declaration or a cabinet vote). Then let's say the president awakens in a mentally deficient state and signs a paper reinstating himself. If the VP and cabinet attempted to override this (as provided for in section 4), who would be recognized as president pending the vote by congress? The amendment doesn't make it clear which declaration would take precedence -- the President's or the cabinet's -- and 21 days would be a long time to go without an official President. Or is the whole point that there would be no President? Thoughts? 128.59.26.129 23:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hypothetical Scenario

Reading section 4 of the 25th amendment, something struck me: what would happen if the Vice President died, and the President was incapacitated and unable to serve? Since section 4 begins "Whenever the Vice President and a majority..." and since it is the Vice President who becomes Acting President, the 25th amendment couldn't be invoked if there was no Vice President. And since only the President can nominate a new Vice President, and he is incapacitated in my hypothetical scenario...wouldn't there in effect be no president?

Ok, I'll answer my own question. In Article II, section 1, it states "... the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected." Congress would have the power to choose an acting President.

In addition to the previous poster's answer, Congress has already enacted such a law (several times). The most recent, the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 USC 19), describes the chain of succession following the Vice President. At the moment, the next two are the Speaker of the House and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, in that order.

There's still the issue of how the President would be declared incapacitated. The 25th ammendment seems to suggest that only the VP and the Cabinet together can do so Nik42 05:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suppose the VP had died and the President falls into a coma. You are correct that the 25th Amendment §4 does not expressly provide for this situation, and the Presidential Succession Act does not set out the procedure for how the President's disability would be formally determined such that the Speaker of the House (or others in the line of succession) would take on the role of Acting President. Despite that, if the President were actually in a coma it would not be that difficult to resolve the situation: presumably some procedure could be designed ad hoc. Similarly, if the President were to declare himself incapacitated, when the vice-presidency were vacant, then nobody would object to the Speaker of the House assuming the role of Acting President. This is exactly what happened on The West Wing. However, The West Wing was incorrect in depicting that situation as an invocation of the 25th Amendment. Legally, since the vice-presidency was vacant, the 25th Amendment had nothing to do with the procedure, since the 25th Amendment is silent on the procedure to be followed if the vice-presidency were vacant. A real constitutional crisis would arise if the vice-presidency were vacant and the President became apparently incapicitated while claiming to have no incapacity. For example, if he became mentally ill and delusional while still believing that he was healthy. That might spawn a constitutional crisis if the vice-presidency were vacant, because the 25th Amendment §4 does not apply with a vacant vice-presidency. The only real solution to the crisis would be for Congress to amend the President Succession Act to simply provide for some procedure whereby some body (perhaps the Cabinet) could determine whether the President is incapacitated if the vice-presidency is vacant. Congress has the authority to make this legislation under Art. II § 1 cl. 6 of the Constitution. The real question is, why hasn't Congress done that already? It is folly to wait for that situation to occur before providing the procedure for it. See Brown and Cinquegrana, "The Realities of Presidential Succession: 'The Emperor Has No Clones'" (1987), 75 Georgetown Law Journal 1389. --Mathew5000 23:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Movies and TV

You forgot "Air Force One." 67.35.26.248 03:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

George W. Bush Paranoid Schizophrenic?

What if Dr. Justin Frank's hypothesis that George W. Bush shows signs of paranoid schizophrenia are justified (book Bush on the Couch? (e.g. Bush is hearing voices telling him what to do, and inventing imaginary threats, and persecuting those who disagree etc.) Is the 25th Amendment the route to remove Bush from office as opposed to impeachment?

ambiguous provision

There should be a description of the "ambiguous provision" and why the 25th was created when it was. I'm assuming it had something to do with Kennedy's assasination. --Gbleem 04:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is already discussed in the article: Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution#Section one: Presidential vacancy. But I will edit to make it clearer.--Mathew5000 05:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to suggest this same thing. The article as of today doesn't seem to explain why the amendment came to being in the 1960s. The article needs just a touch of historical background. --Mdchachi|[[User talk:Mdchachi|Talk]] 18:41, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1987 Reagan incapacity

Presumably the concern about Reagan´s possible incapacity was due to early signs of his Alzheimer´s disease which was finally diagnosed in 1994, though not recognised in 1987? Should this be mentioned in this context? Shulgi 14:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The story doesn't make full sense. Even if White House Chief of Staff Howard Baker (& his staff) decided Reagan was unable to govern, only Reagan or Bush (with Cabinet backing), could invoke the 25th Amendment. GoodDay 22:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oath Required to Exercise Power? (Crazy Technicality Time!)

Say something catastrophic happens and the President is killed. Under Amendment 25, the VP becomes President, not the Acting President. Good so far. But what if the situation is such that executive decisions must be made, and they don't have time to find a notary or judge to administer the oath of office? I've been under the impression that the oath is required to exercise executive power, even if one actually is President by law. But that doesn't seem to make sense for practical reasons. Real world example: it's 10 minutes after JFK is pronounced dead, and LBJ, who is now the President but has yet to take the oath, sees fit to make a big executive decision. Is he allowed to before taking the oath? Does he have to wait until getting sworn in? Or is it technically not allowed, but that technicality would be ignored after the fact (and after the swearing-in)?

Even more out-there: what if LBJ in the example above gives an emergency executive order of some sort after succeeding but before being able to take the oath, but then LBJ is killed before ever being able to take the oath? Since he never was able to swear in, can anything he did during his short tenure as President be considered valid?

Hope that's coherent, Vbdrummer0 04:51, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]