Under the 25th amendment to the Constitution, a U.S. President could be declared “disabled” and removed from office against his will by the Vice President acting together with a majority of the Cabinet.
A new report from the Congressional Research Service details the background and provisions of the amendment.
Proponents of the 25th amendment insisted that it was “not intended to facilitate the removal of an unpopular or failed President,” and that safeguards were in place to prevent abuse.
While Presidents have voluntarily and temporarily declared themselves disabled on three occasions — in 1985, 2002 and 2007 — the provisions for involuntary removal from office have never been implemented. See Presidential Disability Under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment: Constitutional Provisions and Perspectives for Congress, November 5, 2018.
Other new and updated reports from the Congressional Research Service include the following.
The Citizenship Clause and “Birthright Citizenship”: A Brief Legal Overview, CRS Legal Sidebar, November 1, 2018
Internships, Fellowships, and Other Work Experience Opportunities in the Federal Government, updated November 1, 2018
U.S. Trade Policy Functions: Who Does What?, CRS In Focus, November 1, 2018
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians, updated November 2, 2018
The 2020 Decennial Census: Overview and Issues, CRS In Focus, October 31, 2018
Implementation of Treasury’s New Customer Due Diligence Rule: A Step Toward Beneficial Ownership Transparency?, CRS In Focus, October 31, 2018
U.S. Ground Forces Robotics and Autonomous Systems (RAS) and Artificial Intelligence (AI): Considerations for Congress, November 1, 2018
If you’re new to the climate intervention space, welcome! The TL;DR: if we can’t stop the most catastrophic impacts of climate change with current tools quickly enough, then we need a bigger toolbox.
After months of delay, the council tasked by President Trump to review the FEMA released its final report. Our disaster policy nerds have thoughts.
FAS and FLI partnered to build a series of convenings and reports across the intersections of artificial intelligence (AI) with biosecurity, cybersecurity, nuclear command and control, military integration, and frontier AI governance. This project brought together leaders across these areas and created a space that was rigorous, transpartisan, and solutions-oriented to approach how we should think about how AI is rapidly changing global risks.
Investment should instead be directed at sectors where American technology and innovation exist but the infrastructure to commercialize them domestically does not—and where the national security case is clear.