If I remember correctly in one Episode of Stargate SG-1, the president of the United States declares some state of national emergency (world was attacked by aliens) and was able to suspend elections, weaseling around the 22nd Amendment and being able to stay in office indefinitely by keeping up the emergency state. Is it (under current law) actually possible for the US president to stay in office longer than the usual two terms of four years or even forever, by using some legal tricks?
For reference, the episode is S10E13, "The Road Not Taken". Elections are not actually suspended, but changed to a Plebiscite (i.e. people vote directly for the President, without the Electoral College, so each vote is worth the same - an increase in California, but a decrease in Wyoming), but the legitimacy of the voting process during martial law is questionable.
Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 10:08@Chronocidal Nice. I wasn't able to find out which episode it was to look up the actual details of how they made it work.
Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 10:20The short answer is no. The longer answer is that this framing isn't particularly helpful.
There are a number of overlapping factors that prevent the president from legally suspending elections like some tinpot dictator. In particular Article II Section I of the Constitution and the 12th, 20th, 22nd, and 25th amendments which combine to define presidential elections and succession.
Terms ending are not directly linked to elections being held. Even if elections could not be held for some catastrophic reason, the president should still leave office at the end of their term according to the line of succession (if no elections occurred at all many of their terms will have ended at the same time, but there should be a President Pro Tempore of the Senate because Senate terms are staggered). This is all theoretical since it's never been tested and hopefully never will be.
Perhaps an even more boring reason why the president cannot simply suspend presidential elections is that the federal government does not run elections. The state governments do. A state government may have the ability to suspend or reschedule an election, and there are rules in place for if a state fails to make a selection on the prescribed day. If they still haven't named electors in time for the meeting of the Electoral College, that state will simply not cast any votes.
The only legal way around any of this would be modifying the Constitution. Because of course you can make anything 'legal' if you change the definition of what 'legal' means.
At the end of the day though, the real world isn't a game. Even if you could find some obscure and bizarre legal loophole to override precedent, the law isn't a set of magic rules. Its just rules that we made up. Nobody would have to accept it. A democratic government governs with the consent of the people. Attempting to use force to subvert the will of the people would be how a president becomes a dictator.
90k 8 8 gold badges 220 220 silver badges 324 324 bronze badges answered Jun 24, 2019 at 17:58 2,874 15 15 silver badges 19 19 bronze badges +lots for "the law isn't a set of magic rules". This simple fact is often overlooked. Commented Jun 24, 2019 at 19:39"the law isn't a set of magic rules" - also why the peaceful transition of power is not guaranteed, though it's happened many times over. If a President didn't want to leave and they had the support of the military, it would be tough to do much about it.
Commented Jun 24, 2019 at 20:16 Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Commented Jun 26, 2019 at 15:39"the federal government does not run elections" The federal government is in charge of the election of the presidents. It's just that the people who vote in that election are chosen by the states.
Commented Jun 27, 2019 at 17:27The Constitution sets a presidential term at 4 years, and the 22nd amendment pretty firmly sets a two-term maximum:
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.
Since this was a Constitutional amendment, there is no legal way to extend a presidential term after 8 years (or technically 10 if you were a VP-turned-Pres mid-term) without passing a new amendment to allow it. This applies even if elections themselves are suspended for an emergency - the president's term is up when it's up, regardless of whether there's anyone else to take up the office.
Whether or not there's a illegal but effective way to stay president after two terms would be pure speculation.
90k 8 8 gold badges 220 220 silver badges 324 324 bronze badges answered Jun 24, 2019 at 17:12 25.3k 3 3 gold badges 67 67 silver badges 130 130 bronze badgesThere is a legal way: convince the congress and at least 3/4 of the states to amend the constitution.
Commented Jun 24, 2019 at 17:18I don't see, in that quoted text, a limit to how many times I can be Vice-President and then ascend to the Presidency. (Just how many times I can be directly elected. )
Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 13:26@TOOGAM you'd also need to continually either be appointed VP first or serve no more than two years each four-year cycle. (Art XII, "But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.")
Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 20:21@JMK - Only if they've only served one term. As Kevin quoted (and referenced here), you have to be eligible to be President in order to be eligible to become VP. So yes, but it doesn't get them any more time than they'd otherwise have.
Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 21:33A former President could become the speaker of the house and, should the P and VP become unable to perform their duties, they would be next in line. or any other succession post. There is no hard limit except through being elected to the post: so presumably if you could block the P/VP elections, as long as you can get Speaker of the House you'd be President.
Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 21:53Absolutely. There's a simple loophole in the 22nd amendment which allows this to occur:
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice
And combined with the 25th amendment, which came two decades later:
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
Confirmation is different than election. The counter-argument is the 12th amendment:
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States
But again, the 22nd amendment only defines eligibility in the within the context of election. Thanks to the 25th amendment, it is possible to be President without being elected President or Vice President as demonstrated with Gerald Ford.
So imagine if Joe Biden was elected President in 2020 with Elizabeth Warren as running mate. Warren resigns, and Bill Clinton is selected and confirmed as replacement. Biden then resigns as President, making Bill Clinton President via 25th amendment, completely avoiding the "election" mention in the 22nd amendment.
answered Jun 25, 2019 at 21:15 John Heyer John Heyer 227 1 1 silver badge 3 3 bronze badgesRelated: politics.stackexchange.com/questions/37261/… Basically, it's unclear whether this is a valid interpretation or not.
Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 21:37It's probably fair to say that this could happen, but the outcome of a challenge to it in front of the Supreme Court is unclear.
Commented Jun 26, 2019 at 1:05interesting potential loophole, but depends entirely on the idea that someone who cannot be elected to the presidency is still potentially eligible to be president, something I'm not sure of at all.
Commented Jun 26, 2019 at 9:08 Commented Jun 26, 2019 at 21:24This question is not quite so ridiculously far-fetched as it sounds. The bad scenario is strategic nuclear strike on or immediately preceeding election day.
There is no lawful power to suspend elections, and that's the point of having regular elections. But on the other hand, elections can still be suspended. Should this happen, elections will be the least of the matters to worry about, but here goes.
The house turnover on election comes first, but let us say there has yet been no stability to run a new election. The Senate is live because not all of its members are out of office because the nuclear strike preparations are careful. The remaining Senator or Senators must deliberately invoke the following text from the body of the Constitution:
Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days
Now it doesn't say the terms are extended, but there being no other remotely reasonable resolution that leaves any House sitting, that's what it will mean on that day. The resolution of the elector college comes next, and we have no candidates, so nobody gets any votes. The following text of Amendment XII controls:
If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
A law can always be passed and activated. If there is no president, there is nobody to veto it so it will go into effect. Typically the postmaster general would act as president after a nuclear strike because Congress now has too few members to follow the normal sequence, but if it does the Speaker of the House is actually first in line.
However the end of the twelfth amendment is still in force:
But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
This still does what it was always intended to do. The outgoing president is ineligible and so cannot become President directly no matter what Congress passes, and this blocks the last loophole; he cannot become Vice President and advance due to the office of President being vacant.
If you're trying to extend the president's first term pending re-elections, a law extending his first term into the second would be possible. But if it's already the second term, we now trace into the unwritten law. It's not explicitly stated anywhere, but the assumption of the entire writings is that no person who is ineligible to be elected president can be appointed president either. All the qualifications for office in the amendments (but curiously not the main body) assume the only way to become president is to be elected and are written likewise. In addition, the "Tyler Precedent" makes no sense otherwise.
But I believe they would ignore all of this and extend all the terms including President and deal with the Constitutional mess they just made later.
TL;DR No solution: the framers were very thorough.