Episode 50: Wrong Tool for the Job (Brian Kalt, on the 25th Amendment)
Mar 20, 2020
auto_awesome
Guest Brian Kalt from Michigan State University College of Law challenges misconceptions about the 25th Amendment, particularly Section 4. Discussion includes historical context, criteria, and challenges of invoking the amendment in the context of President Trump's fitness for office during crises like COVID-19. The episode clarifies misconceptions about acting cabinet members and emphasizes the importance of aligning understanding to avoid confusion.
The 25th Amendment's Section 4 is designed for extreme cases of presidential incapacity, not just unpopularity or incompetence.
Historical incidents like President Garfield's illness and Eisenhower's health emphasized the need for clear processes of power transfer.
Deep dives
Understanding Section 4 of the 25th Amendment
Section 4 of the 25th Amendment to the US Constitution enables the vice president and a majority of the cabinet to declare the president unfit, leading to the vice president becoming acting president. This process was designed for extreme cases of presidential incapacity, not merely for a president who is perceived as unfit or unpopular. The intent is to address situations where the president is incapacitated, not just unable to perform the duties adequately.
Presidential Succession and 1967 Adoption of the 25th Amendment
The 25th Amendment, adopted in 1967, aimed to provide clarity on presidential succession, particularly in cases of the president's disability or inability to discharge duties. Historical incidents like President Garfield's prolonged illness highlighted the need for a structured process for transfer of power. President Eisenhower's health concerns also underscored the importance of having a clear chain of command to prevent leadership vacuums.
Challenges and Misconceptions Surrounding Section 4 Implementation
One common misconception is the immediate return of presidential powers upon declaration of fitness, which is not the case. Another misconception is that the president can be removed for reasons like incompetence or unpopularity, whereas the 25th Amendment focuses on genuine incapacitation. There are challenges in clarifying who constitutes the 'cabinet' for invoking Section 4, as well as dispelling misconceptions perpetuated by TV portrayals.
Proposals for Clarification and Improvement
Improving public understanding of Section 4 without amending the Constitution includes clarifying that presidential power does not return immediately, defining the 'cabinet' unambiguously, and addressing misconceptions surrounding acting secretaries' participation in the process. Ensuring accurate portrayals in media and recognizing the distinction between unfitness and inability to perform presidential duties are crucial in enhancing public comprehension of Section 4.
ABOUT THIS EPISODE
Concerns about Donald Trump's fitness to serve as U.S. President have motivated many people to advocate for the invocation of the 25th Amendment, particularly Section 4. Those who have engaged in such advocacy--and I've done it--seem to believe that effectively invoking Section 4 of the 25th Amendment could be a way to remove Trump from office. But my guest--Brian Kalt of the Michigan State University College of Law--makes a case that we're wrong.