Posted on 03/08/2017 6:41:50 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Another month has gone by with no medical breakthroughs offering hope to those afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome. That’s a shame, because two Yale law students have taken to the pages of Time Magazine with a plan which clearly demonstrates precisely how bad this mental disorder can get. Unhappy with the results of November’s election, Samuel Breidbart and Vinay Nayak believe they have discovered an infrequently discussed element of constitutional law which could allow for the removal of Donald Trump from office. They’re not talking about impeachment (a proposal which is going nowhere fast), but rather yet another trip into the intricacies of the 25th amendment.
In the recent past when such proposals have been offered, they centered around the main provisions of section 4 of the amendment. Unfortunately, as the authors freely admit, that plan would require the Vice President and a majority of the members of the Cabinet (all of whom were appointed by Trump himself) to pen a letter requesting his removal and send it to Congress. This is a dream which has roughly the same chance of success as the Jets winning the Super Bowl next year. But there is one other element of the amendment which is quite vague in its wording which the authors believe could offer some sort of remedy.
But there is another provision in the Amendment that has received much less popular attention — one that could allow Congress to play a role in removing the President. And no, it isn’t impeachment. Instead, a little-known provision in Section 4 empowers Congress to form its own body to evaluate the President’s fitness for office, eliminating the need for the Cabinet’s involvement in the process (emphasis ours):
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
But what constitutional constraints are put on this power? Remarkably, there aren’t any. The framers of the 25th Amendment left the provision purposely vague, allowing Congress flexibility to decide on its specifics at a later date.
There is the key passage in the 25th amendment upon which the hopes of liberals now ride. “… or of such other body as Congress may by law provide.” It’s right there in the words of the Founders so clearly it’s a valid point of discussion.
There is one major sticking point in this brilliant scheme, however. In the more than two centuries during which Congress has had the opportunity to “provide” such an alternative body, they have opted not to do so. There is no extant committee, commission or panel provided under current law to take on the responsibility of evaluating the mental capacity of the Commander-In-Chief and provide recommendations regarding his continued fitness to serve. Clearly the power to create such a structure exists, but in order to launch into these uncharted waters, congressional Democrats would be starting from scratch.
In order to do it, someone would have to draft a bill calling for the creation of this commission. That bill would have to make it through committee (which would presumably be chaired by a Republican at this time) and then through a full vote in both the House and Senate. Even in some fanciful, fictional world where this might happen, there then comes the small matter of convincing President Trump to sign it into law. Let’s just say that we would be rightly dubious about the possibility of that happening. Having been vetoed, the Democrats would have to scrape up a massive number of votes to override the veto, thus creating the commission in question.
At that point, you would need to actually create the commission, find people willing to serve on it, call them to order and convince them to begin building a case claiming that the President of the United States is suffering from some mental malady which leaves him unfit to serve. By this point in the saga, am I the only one who is seeing this as less likely than the Starks of Winterfell showing up in Washington DC riding on the backs of dragons?
With all of that in mind, let’s examine what might be the better question of the day. Why did Time Magazine see fit to publish this essay in the first place? It was not introduced as a fictional piece, so clearly it was intended to be taken seriously. Was this yet another example of the editors at a major publication seeking to continue the running theme of the new president being somehow illegitimate or unqualified with a mind toward discrediting the entire administration? Food for thought, anyway.
Any “plan” to remove the President should include a way to defend against an armed response from the people. I await their detailed plans.
Gee, these guys sure are creative and capable of original thought. /s
“By law provide” is that congress has to pass a law to create this other body. First problem, for a law to be passed it requires the signature of the president or needs to be veto proof. Second problem, once this other body exists then it can be used against any sitting president. Does the minority really want to open that door?
Trump being President isn’t affecting his mental stability but it does seem to be driving lefties towards a complete break down.
Its hard to feel bad for them because they spend every waking hour scheming how to distort reality.
Yale boys.....your plan to oust Pres. Trump, like many things Yale, depend on whores, backstabbers or traitors for completion. Neither VP Pence, nor the Cabinet Members thus far confirmed, have any of those tendencies. Sux to be you!
That’s not really true. The author is a moron, but he’s right that the 25th Amendment provides alegal way to oust a POTUS who won’t resign. Approval of the VP and a majority of the Cabinet is required to declare a POTUS incapacitated. Of course this was meant to deal with a POTUS who is either mentally or physically incapable of performing his duties. Making the decision contingent on those most loyal to him is intentional - it ensures that this will only be invoked out of true necessity, not because of political expediency.
What the idiot author fails to grasp is that it would be easier to remove Trump via the correct process for removing a POTUS who is doing a poor job (not that Trump is), impeachment. If there really were wodespread belief that Trump should be removed it would not be tough to convince most Senators of either party to go along. Nixon for example would have certainly been removed, had he not resigned to avoid being impeached. The fact is that there is only support for Trump’s removal among the snowflake crowd; all this talk is just fantasy.
Disgusting vermin.
Yale?...Isn’t Yale that school named after Elihu Yale, the notorious slave trader?
It is absurd to think that the 25th Amendment could be used in an ‘incapacitated’ manner against President Trump while he is walking, talking and running this country.
In that case, even if there were forces in his cabinet who wanted to pursue that avenue (against a sitting President and Vice President), it would still likely end up in Congress via the impeachment process. The amendment was mean for being incapacitated and unable to function in his job. Clearly not the case. In that regard, the 25th amendment argument is specious and wholly unworkable.
RE: Yale?...Isn’t Yale that school named after Elihu Yale, the notorious slave trader?
At the rate Yale’s academic culture is going -— It is not far-fetch to imagine that the school’s name will eventually be changed.
To what remains an open question.
Eli Whitney? Of the "Get your cotton picking hands off my gin," renown?
Whitney University? I like it. There’s some sort of rhyme there too. :)
Delusion runs deep
As a community organizer, he sued banks for not giving mortgages to poor people.
As president, he sued banks for burdening poor people w/ mortgages they could never pay back.
==================================================
AND THEN HE SAID: "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."
=====================================================
More like a mentally disturbed pathological liar.
These authors are Yale Law students?!!!
How about forcibly removing those law students from Yale? You could probably get ‘em all on possession, at least; maybe on dealing too.
Back when I taught Jr High Constitution I framed the 25th amendment as the “Oh My God, What Do We Do Now” amendment.
After Eisenhower’s heart attacks, and Kennedy’s assassination (what if he hadn’t died and was mentally incapacitated ) and the reality brought home by the Cuban missile crisis that nuclear war could start and end in a quarter hour or so, there had to be a Constitutional mechanism to replace a disabled President. So they cobbled together the 25th. Knowing that most Presidents would be loath to give up power they had to come up with a way to remove (if even temporarily) a President without it looking like a coup. That’s why the decision is made by officials appointed by the President.
What these people are proposing is a coup d’etat while pretending to be loyal to a Constitution they likely see as fatally flawed.
Minor quibble about the article.
“In the more than two centuries during which Congress has had the opportunity to “provide” such an alternative body, they have opted not to do so.”
The 25th amendment was enacted in February of 1967, 50 years ago, not 2 centuries ago.
In theory we could take the malcontents who are set on our destruction and boil them in oil. In theory we could do likewise to the lying media members. And in theory President Trump could pardon us. Or his Attorney General could offer an immunity from prosecution deal.
Of course these are just theories too. And they are also food for thought. Right Time Magazine?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.