Latest news with #AdviseandConsent
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - How a fictional Vice President Trump could become reality
Last week, I speculated about the possibility of Donald Trump seeking a de facto third term by running as vice president with a puppet as president. I received a flurry of responses citing the Constitution's 12th Amendment as making that likelihood impossible and illegal. A constitutional debate can be dry and arcane. So let's put this possibility into fictional terms, such as the movies 'Advise and Consent,' or even 'Seven Days in May.' Assume, for fictional purposes, the main character has served two terms as president and will not give up power easily. A coup like the one in 'Seven Days in May' is not possible. So, the president brings together a legal team to present a plan that allows the president to run as vice president and circumvent these prohibitions. The last sentence of the 12th Amendment, ratified in 1804, reads: 'But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of president shall be eligible to that of vice-president of the United States.' The 22nd Amendment, approved in 1951, states in part that: 'No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice, and no person who has held the office of president, or acted as president, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected president shall be elected to the office of the president more than once.' Can these two apparently conflicting amendments be resolved? The president's lawyers show how he can run for vice president. The 12th Amendment applied the same requirements for the president to the vice president because that person could assume the presidency if it became vacant. They must be at least 35 years of age, native born, be a U.S. resident for at least 14 years and win a majority of the Electoral College. The 22nd Amendment was passed 147 years later. Clearly, the two–term limit should not be applicable retroactively. If the president left office before the end of the term, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who is next in line, would assume the office. The president is disqualified by the 22nd Amendment. The lawyers also lay out the opposite case that the 22nd Amendment takes precedence, meaning no president can serve more than two terms, in order to strategize how to beat this counterargument. The answer should be obvious: Let the courts decide. For purposes of this story, the president has appointed enough conservative Supreme Court associate judges to give himself an apparent 7-2 majority. Hence, as this case would go to the court, the president almost certainly would win. Of course, the consequences of this decision would be the equivalent of a political nuclear explosion. In this movie, the lawyers would review the most contested and controversial elections, which took place in 1876 and 2000. On Nov. 7, 1876, Republican Rutherford B. Hayes defeated Democrat Samuel J. Tilden. Tilden led Hayes by more than 260,000 popular votes. As the Electoral College met to determine the president, Tilden had 184 electoral votes, one less than needed to win the election. Hayes had only 165. However, 19 electoral votes were in doubt. How was this constitutional stalemate resolved? With no supporting case for precedence, the U.S. Congress formed an Electoral Commission. After considerable and heated debate, in early March 1877, the commission awarded the 20 contested electoral votes to Hayes. Thus, while losing the popular vote, Hayes won the election 185-184. In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote over George W. Bush. But despite ongoing recounts in Florida, whose electoral votes would determine the winner, the Supreme Court ordered that the recount be halted. Bush was in the lead and was elected president. The election of 2028 in this plot could make these two cases seem tame. Graphic riots and violence would be the likely outcome. But in 2000, the story rested in the Supreme Court, where one angry judge halted the proceedings, throwing the election into chaos. Originally, presidents were inaugurated on March 20 because of slow-paced horse and carriage transportation. Inauguration Day in this era is Jan. 20. Moving from fiction to reality and the possibility that Trump would actually seek the vice presidency, the lesson is clear for Democrats: Winning the House in 2028 is vital. But what a story the alternative brings! Harlan Ullman, Ph.D., is UPI's Arnaud deBorchgrave Distinguished Columnist, a senior advisor at Washington, D.C.'s Atlantic Council, the chairman of two private companies and the principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. He and David Richards are working on a forthcoming book. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
26-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
How a fictional Vice President Trump could become reality
Last week, I speculated about the possibility of Donald Trump seeking a de facto third term by running as vice president with a puppet as president. I received a flurry of responses citing the Constitution's 12th Amendment as making that likelihood impossible and illegal. A constitutional debate can be dry and arcane. So let's put this possibility into fictional terms, such as the movies 'Advise and Consent,' or even 'Seven Days in May.' Assume, for fictional purposes, the main character has served two terms as president and will not give up power easily. A coup like the one in 'Seven Days in May' is not possible. So, the president brings together a legal team to present a plan that allows the president to run as vice president and circumvent these prohibitions. The last sentence of the 12th Amendment, ratified in 1804, reads: 'But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of president shall be eligible to that of vice-president of the United States.' The 22nd Amendment, approved in 1951, states in part that: 'No person shall be elected to the office of the president more than twice, and no person who has held the office of president, or acted as president, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected president shall be elected to the office of the president more than once.' Can these two apparently conflicting amendments be resolved? The president's lawyers show how he can run for vice president. The 12th Amendment applied the same requirements for the president to the vice president because that person could assume the presidency if it became vacant. They must be at least 35 years of age, native born, be a U.S. resident for at least 14 years and win a majority of the Electoral College. The 22nd Amendment was passed 147 years later. Clearly, the two–term limit should not be applicable retroactively. If the president left office before the end of the term, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who is next in line, would assume the office. The president is disqualified by the 22nd Amendment. The lawyers also lay out the opposite case that the 22nd Amendment takes precedence, meaning no president can serve more than two terms, in order to strategize how to beat this counterargument. The answer should be obvious: Let the courts decide. For purposes of this story, the president has appointed enough conservative Supreme Court associate judges to give himself an apparent 7-2 majority. Hence, as this case would go to the court, the president almost certainly would win. Of course, the consequences of this decision would be the equivalent of a political nuclear explosion. In this movie, the lawyers would review the most contested and controversial elections, which took place in 1876 and 2000. On Nov. 7, 1876, Republican Rutherford B. Hayes defeated Democrat Samuel J. Tilden. Tilden led Hayes by more than 260,000 popular votes. As the Electoral College met to determine the president, Tilden had 184 electoral votes, one less than needed to win the election. Hayes had only 165. However, 19 electoral votes were in doubt. How was this constitutional stalemate resolved? With no supporting case for precedence, the U.S. Congress formed an Electoral Commission. After considerable and heated debate, in early March 1877, the commission awarded the 20 contested electoral votes to Hayes. Thus, while losing the popular vote, Hayes won the election 185-184. In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote over George W. Bush. But despite ongoing recounts in Florida, whose electoral votes would determine the winner, the Supreme Court ordered that the recount be halted. Bush was in the lead and was elected president. The election of 2028 in this plot could make these two cases seem tame. Graphic riots and violence would be the likely outcome. But in 2000, the story rested in the Supreme Court, where one angry judge halted the proceedings, throwing the election into chaos. Originally, presidents were inaugurated on March 20 because of slow-paced horse and carriage transportation. Inauguration Day in this era is Jan. 20. Moving from fiction to reality and the possibility that Trump would actually seek the vice presidency, the lesson is clear for Democrats: Winning the House in 2028 is vital. But what a story the alternative brings! Harlan Ullman, Ph.D., is UPI's Arnaud deBorchgrave Distinguished Columnist, a senior advisor at Washington, D.C.'s Atlantic Council, the chairman of two private companies and the principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. He and David Richards are working on a forthcoming book.
