Someone on GAW introduced me to the "Ford Play" yesterday. Nixon's VP was originally Spiro Agnew. Agnew resigned in 1973 over an income tax scandal and was replaced by Gerald Ford. Less than a year later, Nixon resigned and Ford became POTUS without ever receiving a vote. This is something to keep in mind.
edit: There is potentially a Constitutional loophole that could even allow for Obama himself to become POTUS for a third term. The 22nd amendment prohibits anyone from being "ELECTED" to POTUS more than twice, but as you can see from the Ford Play above, Ford was never elected to POTUS at all. Something else to keep in mind.
edit 2: since I got stickied (Thanks), I want to add that I'm not making a prediction here at all. Even if research on this idea checks out, I would still say that it's only one of many possible DS plans. Not all plans get used. Not all plans work out. Just something to keep in mind.
All very interesting! I thought the most interesting part was the potential for a dead locked Senate in the nomination of a VP. Couple of random questions: Can the 25th be enacted if the Office of VP is vacant? Can an acting VP be appointed if there is a delay in confirming a new VP? Would the Speaker move up to POTUS only if both offices of VP and POTUS were vacant?
edit: we're in a funny spot right now where there are rumors of POTUS, VP and Speaker all ready to leave. Plus #3 in succession (Leahy) is ready to check out too.
Per the 25th, if presidency is vacant, VP becomes POTUS, thus ending the ambiguity over "acts" or "becomes." And this is only in cases of actual vacancy, such as death, removal or resignation. Temporary inability to discharge powers, VP is just acting president.
For a simultaneous POTUS and VP vacancy, we must turn to statutory law. The Speaker, Pro Temp, Sec of State etc down the list shall ACT as (but really, become) president "until the expiration of the then current Presidential term," except in cases of qualification (disputed election) or inability to discharge powers (25th Amendment). In said cases, they'd be acting president until the president/VP-elect qualifies or disability removed.
But interestingly, as to your questions, delays and confusion could cause chaos. Let's use December of 2020 as a hypothetical example...
POTUS (Trump) and VP (Pence) both resign. Speaker (Pelosi) becomes POTUS. But before a VP replacement can be appointed and approved by Congress, the [Trump] cabinet, before they can be replaced, uses the 25th on the former Speaker turned POTUS (Pelosi), on account of disability. House hasn't been able to vote on a new Speaker yet. So now we have POTUS, VP and Speaker all vacant. Next in line to be acting POTUS is President Pro Tempore (trust Grassley). Say this individual is then 25th'd by the Cabinet on account of disability, or resigns, then Sec of State (trust Kanasas) is up, assuming Senate has no time to vote in a new pro tempore. Keep in mind that in this hypothetical, if Pelosi is a case of inability to discharge duties, then Grassley and/or Pompeo is only acting president until disability is removed, which could theoretically be never.
Lots of fun games could be played if there was a highly coordinated effort.
That would be fun. They really should do things like that more often. Thanks!
edit: That would be a creative way to kick someone out of their office, wouldn't it? In your hypothetical Nancy could lose Speaker, become POTUS and then become unemployed in a matter of minutes and never know until after the fact. Could that be done without being disclosed to public?
Exactly. I suppose some of these hypothetical chess moves could be kept secret from the public under the claim of impact on national security.
The removal of powers due to disability under the 25th amendment can be ended by the president simply submitting a written statement to Congress saying they aren't unable to be president. So it wouldn't ever stick, as Pelosi would just have to simply submit a short written letter to Congress and she'd be back in power. That is built really for comas or if the president had surgery but had a bad recovery or something, where they literally couldn't just write and submit a simple letter to Congress.
Not exactly.
Section 3 discusses the president willingly initiating the temporary "stepping away" (my paraphrase) by submitting a written statement to the Speaker and President Pro Tempore (PPT), not Congress, just to these 2 individuals. Under this process, POTUS resumes powers and duties after he writes back to these 2 individuals. Think of it as voluntary check-in to rehab, but in verse, instead of going in and coming out as you please, it's leaving and returning as you please.
But in a Section 4 situation, if the VP+ (majority of cabinet etc) submit the note to the Speaker&PPT, POTUS can resume powers by writing to the Speaker&PPT to declare absence of inability UNLESS within 4 days VP+ tells Speaker&PPT that no, POTUS is not fit, in which case then Congress gets looped into the process. Congress, if not in session, is supposed to be assembled within 48 hours to vote on the matter. They have 21 days to act on the matter and if 2/3 (ambiguity as to 2/3 in each, 290 House AND 66 Senate, OR 356 of the total... "both" implies the latter, and it would be a joint session, which usually means a total vote of Congress) side with VP+, then POTUS remains "unfit." Note that during this period, VP is acting POTUS. Also to note, this isn't talking about permanent removal from office, which can only be as the result of death, resignation or impeachment. Theoretically, the VP+ and Congress could essentially confine the sitting POTUS to the "bench/IR" so to speak, indefinitely, while the VP (or Speaker, or PPT etc.) acts as POTUS with all powers and duties.
While the original intent of this amendment (1963-65) is innocent on its face, to deal with the recent specific issue of JFK being assassinated, the reality is that the issue had been ambiguous and unresolved for a long time... His Ascendency, John Tyler... Fillmore, Johnson, Arthur, TR, Cal, FDR... the issue of "disability" was more dealing with cases like Wilson and FDR. Yes, the intent was to deal with innocuous circumstances like illnesses etc. but the law still covers vacancy situations in general, regardless of how those circumstances come bout. Given everything that we've learned over the years, it's quite possible that through a coordinated effort, power could be utilized to manipulate situations into making everything fit "according to the law."
Have you watched "House of Cards"? ;)
That ruins everything.
If Congress is not in session, there's a 21 day window. Lot of things can happen over 21 days.