[Eugene Volokh, July 29, 2004 at 2:09pm] Possible Trackbacks
What happens if the Inauguration gets bombed?Say Kerry is elected, but on Jan. 20, the Inauguration gets bombed, and Kerry and Edwards are both killed. Even if the Speaker of the House or the President Pro Tem of the Senate step aside (perhaps because they're of the opposite party, and conclude they have no mandate to govern), the rest of the chain of succession consists entirely of Cabinet secretaries -- who are all still holdovers from the old Administration.
There's thus no way for the Presidency to quickly pass into the hands of anyone who has the late President-elect's, and thus indirectly the people's, imprimatur. The best that can be done, unless I'm mistaken, is for one of the Republicans in the line of succession to get sworn in, propose a Democrat as Vice-President -- preferably one who's approved by the Democratic leadership -- and then resign in the Vice-President's favor. But this could involve quite a bit of time and acrimony, at a time when the country can't afford the distraction.
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), the chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, proposed an interesting Senate resolution: A nonbinding agreement (it probably can't be made binding, given the President's and the Senate's broad constitutional powers in this area) that the outgoing President appoint, and the Senate confirm, some of the incoming President's Cabinet picks before Inauguration Day. This would of course work best with a revision of the Presidential Succession Act (at least to remove the Congressional officials from the line of succession), which Sen. Cornyn would also favor; and it would surely still leave lots of other problems in any event. Still, I'm glad some people are thinking about this, and that a Republican Senator is willing to suggest it even when the immediately forthcoming transition -- if there will be a transition -- would be from a Republican to a Democrat.
Interesting idea that would safeguard sucession to the elected party in case of both the President-elect and the VP-elect getting killed at the same time.
Opinions?
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."- General Sir Charles Napier
I don't think any recent ones would willingly go along with it, but enough pressure can be applied by civic minded members of the outgoing President's party to force the outgoing administration to comply.
Personally, I think a constitutional amendment specifying that the President-elect's SecState nominee should be confirmed by the Senate on Jan 19 would be a good idea if we're concerned about terrorists killing both the President-elect and the VP-elect at the same time.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."- General Sir Charles Napier
Glocksman wrote:I don't think any recent ones would willingly go along with it, but enough pressure can be applied by civic minded members of the outgoing President's party to force the outgoing administration to comply.
Personally, I think a constitutional amendment specifying that the President-elect's SecState nominee should be confirmed by the Senate on Jan 19 would be a good idea if we're concerned about terrorists killing both the President-elect and the VP-elect at the same time.
The problem I see with that, is the President elect did his campaign and toured the nation and spoke his platform, ect... While any potential cabinet member is 'appointed' and really not much is know about them until the selection process, unless already well known.
By skipping over the shit heads in the Congress and going straight for the elect cabinet members, you're getting a big unknown and one that really wasn't even close to 'elected'. The only plus I see, is what ever party happens to have won the election.
*shrug* it is an interesting idea though.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
